Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/01/12

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] A REAL LEICA OR A COUNTERFIT?
From: photo at frozenlight.eu (Nathan Wajsman)
Date: Mon Jan 12 11:20:06 2009
References: <C58EE385.48063%mark@rabinergroup.com><79pc8o$1r6qik@pd6mo1no-svcs.prod.shaw.ca><6af76ca00901110020x441bfad5p19c6ef93f8e59cc9@mail.gmail.com><4969C8BA.1040403@gmx.de><DDD411DD8BEC4BD887F198B49BBAB39C@D1S9FY41><71E2C9B3E46D46818655818A08B64594@precisionm50><496A436F.9010608@tele2.fr> <629954238.20090112090436@tesco.net> <1A334A601C694BB885A1E53CE1DC1E49@dadquad> <1719861665.20090112141024@tesco.net>

Let's be sensible. While it is correct that it is forbidden to trade  
in Nazi paraphenalia in France (ebay and Yahoo had to make adjustments  
to their sites when that law was brought in a few years ago), and  
there are restrictions in Germany as well, I very much doubt that  
anyone would be prosecuted for including a link in a response to an e- 
mail on a mailing list which contained that link to begin with.

Nathan

Nathan Wajsman
Alicante, Spain
http://www.frozenlight.eu
http://www.greatpix.eu
http://www.nathanfoto.com

Books: http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/search?search=wajsman&x=0&y=0
PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws
Blog: http://www.fotocycle.dk/blog



On Jan 12, 2009, at 3:10 PM, lindnich@tesco.net wrote:

> Hello Geoff,
>
> So is it the case for the LUG that the most restrictive laws of  
> censorship worldwide rule?
> Or are we all individually responsible for keeping within the law in  
> our own country?
>
> BWs Gordon
>
> Monday, January 12, 2009, 9:29:47 AM, you wrote:
>
> GH> BWs Gordon, Philippe was explaining that linking to a site with  
> Nazi
> GH> symbology is an offence in (at least) some countries in Europe.  
> Perhaps all
> GH> of it?? If Philippe for example was to respond with a post that  
> still
> GH> included the provided link he would have offended under French  
> law.
> GH> Certainly under German law as well. I don't know about other  
> European
> GH> nations specifically.
> GH> No spittoon involved. A legality IS however. I'm sure that we  
> would all
> GH> prefer that there be no implication that the LUG distributes  
> offensive
> GH> material. I don't mean to imply that the poster intended to  
> cause offence or
> GH> was aware of the issue, only that there is potential for a legal  
> difficulty.
> GH> What is acceptable legally in USA is not always acceptable  
> elsewhere. No
> GH> doubt there are reciprocal situations on other issues.
>
>
> GH> Cheers
> GH> Geoff
> GH> http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman/e
> GH> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/gh/
> GH> Pick up your camera and make the best photo you can.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information


Replies: Reply from sonc.hegr at gmail.com (Sonny Carter) ([Leica] A REAL LEICA OR A COUNTERFIT?)
In reply to: Message from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] Creeped out)
Message from tedgrant at shaw.ca (Ted Grant) ([Leica] A REAL LEICA OR A COUNTERFIT?)
Message from crbirchenhall at googlemail.com (Christopher Birchenhall) ([Leica] A REAL LEICA OR A COUNTERFIT?)
Message from douglas.sharp at gmx.de (Douglas Sharp) ([Leica] A REAL LEICA OR A COUNTERFIT?)
Message from sethrosner at nycap.rr.com (Seth Rosner) ([Leica] A REAL LEICA OR A COUNTERFIT?)
Message from leica at web-options.com (Bob W) ([Leica] A REAL LEICA OR A COUNTERFIT?)
Message from philippe.amard at tele2.fr (Philippe AMARD) ([Leica] A REAL LEICA OR A COUNTERFIT?)
Message from lindnich at tesco.net (lindnich@tesco.net) ([Leica] A REAL LEICA OR A COUNTERFIT?)
Message from hoppyman at bigpond.net.au (Geoff Hopkinson) ([Leica] A REAL LEICA OR A COUNTERFIT?)
Message from lindnich at tesco.net (lindnich@tesco.net) ([Leica] A REAL LEICA OR A COUNTERFIT?)