locked Re: Seeding groups


 

Chris,

The question is whether it should be opt in or opt out.
I've no problem with it being opt-out, in the sense of having a place during the join and invite mechanisms where the option is pre-checked. But I believe that the option must be fairly presented before the transfer action is taken. And it must not be taken on behalf of original members who choose not to join the Groups.io version of the group.

If someone needs to opt into the transfer of their content, the vast
majority of people will simply neglect to do so, even if they wouldn't
have an issue with it.
That all depends on how easy it is to accomplish, how it is presented to the members, and any "motivators" the group managers might wish to employ. I'm sure we could brainstorm some approaches to make it be a "natural" action to take.

This would make group owners reluctant to transfer to this service.
Maybe. But compared to what alternative?

I'll grant that some group owners seem to feel proprietary about the content of their group - as if it is "theirs" to do with as they please. Others may legitimately feel that their members trust them with custodianship of the members' content.

But members can be very touchy about such issues too. In some types of groups I wouldn't want to be the manager faced with the wrath of a member who believes their content has migrated without permission.

Imagine if someone acquired Yahoo groups, all content would transfer to
the new company and those who didn't wish this to happen would be given
the ability to opt out. It is the same thing here.
No, that is a completely different scenario. In that case the acquiring company generally acquires both the rights and the responsibilities of Yahoo with regard to the user's content. They "step into Yahoo's shoes" as it is said. And the members might not be given any opt-out opportunity other than retaining the right of deletion which Yahoo granted them.

But this doesn't violate copyright.
I beg to differ. And you will get strong opinions on that point not just from me.

When you post material to a public mailing list, you've implicitly given
the group owner permission to archive the content and for it to be
distributed to other users.
No. Again, with a Yahoo Group the only agreement is between the member and Yahoo.

The group owner has absolutely no rights or privileges with respect to the members' content, other than the privilege of exclusion (the group manager may prevent posting or remove a member's content at will). This is because the group manager is not the operator of the service - he/she is just another Yahoo user.

If someone is unhappy with this, then they can delete all their content.
If they are unhappy with this they can file a take-down order against Groups.io under U.S. law. This is an administrative hassle and legal liability that Groups.io will likely take pains to avoid.

Furthermore, anyone who posts on a public mailing list can't expect to
maintain complete control over where that content goes.
While that's true, in a practical sense, the law is an ass.

Moreover, not all Yahoo Groups are "public" - many (most, the vast majority?) have their content restricted to members-only access, and many (most?) have restricted membership. Members of such groups tend to particularly sensitive to the subject of having their content turn up elsewhere.

It is not the job of Groups.io to determine this ...
It is the responsibility of Groups.io to operate within the law of the land. And for all its faults U.S. copyright law (the DMCA) is clear enough where internet service providers are concerned.

... any more than it was the responsibility of Youtube to verify the
copyright status of each and every video that was uploaded.
Um, you should be aware that Youtube does exactly that on an ongoing basis. They do sophisticated pattern matching on an unprecedented (and truly astonishing) scale.
https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2797370

-- Shal

Join main@beta.groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.