 |
 |
Hi an interesting discussion... As list administrator, maybe I should add one or two observations: When Emma and I established the list in December 1994 it was primarily out of a sense of some isolation, and a motivation to contact and exchange with like-minded people in the Internet community. However, over time we also became aware of a secondary motivation, realising that Internet communities offered an ideal social space within which to seek a greater democratisation and accountability for academic and activist debates. This motivation has in many ways guided the development and managment of the list (in an imperfect way of course!). So, it has been important to me that the list should be unmoderated, that it should be open to public subscription, and that the contributions should be in the public domain. We were certainly very aware of the potential for 'lurking' from the outset (and discussed it with some activist groups) and I would not discourage that, particularly because many disability groups have found it very useful to lurk on this list and to learn more about the way that academics talk to one another (which otherwise often happens in closed academic spaces). It has certainly been an education for me and no doubt for many others :-) Every message sent to the list is archived in the public domain on the list web site and is open to browsing by anyone with Internet access (whether or not they are members of this list). All contributions are therefore texts in the public domain. They are in that sense published texts (in which individual copyright exists under UK law). As the material is in the public domain, there is actually no need for anyone to 'lurk' (the word is somewhat pejorative I think) since it is possible to read everything either currently or retrospectively without being on the list membership at all. Quoting or plagiarising such texts without attribution is clearly a breach of trust and copyright but our general understanding is that attributed quotation of short passages for the purposes of scholarship or critique is entirely consistent with the legal use of such texts. There are of course standard protocols for the referencing of e-mail contributions in the APA/Harvard systems etc. My personal view (and I think that generally accepted) is that each contribution exists as a separate text in this respect and that there is no editorial copyright existing in the body of work representing the list as a whole. I certainly wouldn't claim any, since the messages are unmoderated. So, I guess it is worth noting that contributors should regard their contributions as published texts. The sender can reasonably be held accountable for the content (libel/slander etc.) and any subsequent user is accountable for the use of that text. So, if anyone feels the need for more private discussions then perhaps it would be best not to hit the send button or to start a closed list of their own. For my part, I have (mostly) enjoyed the openness and accountability resulting from our discussions and hope that they continue. PS. An explanation of how UK copyright law applies to our list is available at: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/docs/email_copyright.htm Hope that helps. Best wishes Mark. ________________End of message______________________ Archives and tools for the Disability-Research Discussion List are now located at: www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html You can JOIN or LEAVE the list from this web page.