access on other news server?
in [MFC]
|
From: RB on 28 Jun 2010 05:03 > Hector Santos wrote: >............<cut>............. > While people will say that no one owns the usenet newsgroups, that is > a red-herring and fallacy. Microsoft owns the microsoft.* heirarchy > and if they ASK that they be removed from the GateKeeper's official > list, that MAY BE honored. > Statement froms the "Gatekeeps" have said that as Microsoft removes > its newsgroups from its own SERVER, they will be removed from the > official list. > ..........<cut>......... Thanks Hector for the extremely detailed and knowledgeable reply. That cleared up loads of ambiguities on the ins and outs of news servers and group access. I only have two questions: 1. I would surmise there may be a legal or professional or at least a logistical precedence involved as to whether the gatekeepers honor a remove request from a corporate owner of the hierarchy ? 2. And I would also surmise there would be a legal work around, say some sort of slight name change etc, so that if a there was sufficient reward motivation, a news server and it's gatekeeper could in fact continue the group (though slightly re-engineered, notwithstanding the aspect of other mirror motivation ) ?
From: Hector Santos on 28 Jun 2010 22:13 RB, I don't see my reply posted. I'll keep it short now. I think that push come to sholve MS will have a strong say about their how their copyright, trademark and namesake will be used. So I think the removals will be honor, not so much because people are forced to, but thats natural to remove groups that are no longer supported, especially one that had a corporate entity behind it. Since that was a sore point anyway with people feeling it should of been part of the comp.* heirarchy anyway, they will have no problem removing it. The only thing that will probably happen is isolated servers attempting to keep the same names possible as a way to lure users. So how that is exploited, how big and what happens from there is all guess work. But in my view, I don't think MS will work their namesake to be used out there as microsoft.* as a official support avenue - as long as that is clear, then its probably ok. My opinion. RB wrote: > >> Hector Santos wrote: >> ............<cut>............. >> While people will say that no one owns the usenet newsgroups, that is >> a red-herring and fallacy. Microsoft owns the microsoft.* heirarchy >> and if they ASK that they be removed from the GateKeeper's official >> list, that MAY BE honored. >> Statement froms the "Gatekeeps" have said that as Microsoft removes >> its newsgroups from its own SERVER, they will be removed from the >> official list. >> ..........<cut>......... > > Thanks Hector for the extremely detailed and knowledgeable reply. > That cleared up loads of ambiguities on the ins and outs of news servers > and group access. > I only have two questions: > > 1. I would surmise there may be a legal or professional or at least a > logistical precedence involved as to whether the gatekeepers honor a > remove request from a corporate owner of the hierarchy ? > > 2. And I would also surmise there would be a legal work around, say some > sort of slight name change etc, so that if a there was sufficient > reward motivation, a news server and it's gatekeeper could in fact > continue the group (though slightly re-engineered, notwithstanding > the aspect of other mirror motivation ) ? -- HLS
From: RB on 1 Jul 2010 12:11 I sent the below question to my news server the other day and got the response (shown below question) today July 1st. ---------question sent to newsguy-------------------------- Hello, Microsoft is in the process of closing many of it's news groups and going the http forum route. However, many of us who subscribe to a pay server like newsguy can still see and post and get current replies from group mirrors that can no longer be accessed thru MS's corporate server. My question is, how long is this going to continue? I.e. are you required (by any legal or accepted or logistical precedence) to no longer mirror corporate closed groups ? If so and the demand was there could you restart the group under a similar name but leave out MS's name? --------response from newsguy July 1st------------------- Hi RB, To the best of my knowledge, Microsoft is no longer supporting their "microsoft.*" Usenet newsgroups, and I believe this entails the following: Microsoft will no longer carry the groups on their local news servers. The "microsoft.*" hierarchy of newsgroups will still remain on outside news servers, which would permit the following: 1) The outside news servers that continue to carry the "microsoft.*" groups will continue to exchange any posts that are made to the groups. 2) If your paid or free news server carries the "microsoft.*" groups you can post content to them and see posts that folks have posted through their outside news servers. As far as I know the above mentioned arrangement would not change until/if Microsoft requires outside news servers to remove the "microsoft.*" hierarchy of groups. If that should happen, there shouldn't be a problem with Usenet users creating an identical list of groups that omits the "microsoft" name from the group titles. Best regards, NewsGuy Support
From: Bert Hyman on 1 Jul 2010 12:23
In news:uZ3SagTGLHA.5160(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl "RB" <NoMail(a)NoSpam> wrote: > As far as I know the above mentioned arrangement would not > change until/if Microsoft requires outside news servers to remove > the "microsoft.*" hierarchy of groups. That can't happen. -- Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN bert(a)iphouse.com |