>The key phrase here is "you are informed." You have to be informed >and agree to it. ... Can I politely encourage people who are not lawyers to refrain from expressing legal opinions here, or even worse stating legal opinions as though they were facts? I know just enough about copyright law to know that it is complex and subtle, it is hard to say exactly what is a license and what is fair use, and should a situation like this end up in court, the result will depend on the detailed facts of the case including arguments about what's the customary usage of messages sent to mailing lists and whether people are aware of the physical locations of archives so they know what law applies and so forth. I have my opinions about what's legitimate and what's not, but I am not under any illusions that a judge would necessarily agree with me. Besides, we already got the opinion of an actual lawyer for free. What a deal. R's, John _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf