Re: Genie and Delphi

[Rubywand <rubywand@swbell.net>]

Paul Schultz writes ...
> 
> On Fri, 18 Sep 1998, Rubywand wrote:
> 
> >
> >      Not really. Hiding part of the contents normally available to
> > subscribers would not make sense. For one thing, it would take just one
> > subscriber to 'spill the beans'. For another, you miss out on showing
> > some wares you are proud of.
> 
> The above logic really shoots the original premise of this thread right
> in the foot. If it only takes one user to 'spill the beans', you
> would think that one user would have spoken up already....Unless we want
> to get into the notion of a well orchestrated conspiracy! :-)
>

     A few different issues have been discussed. One is how best to let
copyright owners know what is on an archive available for downloading.
Public archives do this by permitting anyone to peruse the contents
which may be downloaded.

     Tony has explained that for-pay A2 archives on Genie and Delphi do
not, at present, have any way to permit anyone except subscribers to
peruse the contents which may be downloaded. So, Tony notes, for-pay
archives check with the copyright owner when there is a new upload.

     Fine. Public archives have one approach and for-pay archives have
another.


     The logic of the response you quote relates specifically to the
question: IF a for-pay archive were to allow non-subscribers to peruse
the contents, would there be any concern that the archive might hide
items which subscribers could see and download? My response was 'of
course Not'. As the logic shows, we would have no reason to expect any
silliness or "conspiracy".



Rubywand