I don't know if bringing the law into it will do any good or not, but what about fighting software with software? I'm not really familiar with this sort of content grabbing but maybe someone who knows more about it has an idea of how we can make the mailing lists less palatable? Is there something that could be done in the configuration that would screw up their system without making it impossible to use for legitimate users?
Michelle
On 5/10/2007 9:00:44 AM, blogdiva@culturekitchen.com wrote:
Yeah, I call it stealing, impersonation and ad gouging.
Why do they not only have to replicate the email list in its entirety but go out of their way to use my email address in order to create a false account in their "service" --an account I can't delete or disable?
And all the while running GoogleAds on every single frigging page?
Impersonation is illegal in the United States, but how to deal with something like that with a company that is looking for the added attention and traffic to begin with?
BTW : At no point here at Drupal was it stated anywhere on the mailing lists that they would be completely open for anybody to do whatever they want with the content ALONG WITH our email addresses.
It would have been nice to know 2 years ago that this was the case with Drupal's mailing lists. Could a disclaimer be set on the footer of all future emails and on all mailing lists?
/ liza
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Michelle Cox schrieb:
I don't know if bringing the law into it will do any good or not, but what about fighting software with software? I'm not really familiar with this sort of content grabbing but maybe someone who knows more about it has an idea of how we can make the mailing lists less palatable? Is there something that could be done in the configuration that would screw up their system without making it impossible to use for legitimate users?
nabble.com is simply subscribed to this mailing list. No screenscraping is going on. They did remove lists that we didn't want to be there (the consulting ML for example) when asked. I don't see a problem with them providing an additional archive considering that it is public anyway and and ours lacks a lot of features.
Cheers, Gerhard
Excuse me? They have created profile accounts for each and every member of the list! Is that really acceptable? Where did it say here at Drupal that I had to relinquish my email and identity if I accepted to be part of the list?
/ liza
On 10.May.2007, at 10:18, Gerhard Killesreiter wrote:
nabble.com is simply subscribed to this mailing list. No screenscraping is going on. They did remove lists that we didn't want to be there (the consulting ML for example) when asked. I don't see a problem with them providing an additional archive considering that it is public anyway and and ours lacks a lot of features.
In response to "blogdiva@culturekitchen.com" blogdiva@culturekitchen.com:
Excuse me? They have created profile accounts for each and every member of the list! Is that really acceptable? Where did it say here at Drupal that I had to relinquish my email and identity if I accepted to be part of the list?
Every other public archive of this mailing list is revealing your email as well. The "profile" is nothing more than analysis of your posting habits, with hooks to allow people to "rate" the quality of your posts.
I find it odd, but I can't see that there's any violation of privacy here. You knew that the drupal lists were publicly archived. Finding out that another site is archiving them as well with props shouldn't be that surprising.
On 10.May.2007, at 10:18, Gerhard Killesreiter wrote:
nabble.com is simply subscribed to this mailing list. No screenscraping is going on. They did remove lists that we didn't want to be there (the consulting ML for example) when asked. I don't see a problem with them providing an additional archive considering that it is public anyway and and ours lacks a lot of features.
-- [ Drupal support list | http://lists.drupal.org/ ]
On May 10, 2007, at 11:01 AM, Bill Moran wrote:
I find it odd, but I can't see that there's any violation of privacy here. You knew that the drupal lists were publicly archived. Finding out that another site is archiving them as well with props shouldn't be that surprising.
I will say this: There are no "props" on a site that rewrites urls to its own domain and provides no links to the source. (The only d.o links I can find are embedded within the posts themselves.) It's scraping. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_scraping
It may not be a problem for a community like Drupal, with open licensing etc., but it's still inappropriate internet etiquette, imho.
Also, as there has been so much pushback against balkanizing Drupal discussion in different areas, I wonder how people here feel about forked discussions on a 3d party site.
Sites like Nabble are a peeve of mine (and many other folks), but if the community here doesn't have a problem with scraped, forked discussions, so be it. Next topic.
Laura
On 5/10/07, Gerhard Killesreiter gerhard@killesreiter.de wrote:
They did remove lists that we didn't want to be there (the consulting ML for example) when asked.
Has something changed, because the consulting list is up: http://www.nabble.com/Drupal---Consulting-f14427.html
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Corey Bordelon schrieb:
On 5/10/07, Gerhard Killesreiter gerhard@killesreiter.de wrote:
They did remove lists that we didn't want to be there (the consulting ML for example) when asked.
Has something changed, because the consulting list is up: http://www.nabble.com/Drupal---Consulting-f14427.html
Maybe it was another list. We had them remove all lists with non-public archives.
Cheers, Gerhard
-
Bill Moran -
blogdiva＠culturekitchen.com -
Corey Bordelon -
Gerhard Killesreiter -
Laura Scott -
Michelle Cox