[zetetic]

Originally Posted by JTMON

Bira didn't explain anything then, you are not referencing the post I am talking about...I don't even think you looked in the right thread actually. He posted the law...I quoted his post and showed which parts of the law seem to render this moot. Maybe find that post and check again...

I referenced the post you quoted her from. If you want to discuss something else she said you should've quoted it.

It also still applies to vbulletin because you are making the assumption that ever vb owner leaves that checkbox and message working the default way which is not a good thing to assume...still applies here.

I never made that assumption, but that is the default configuration of the software. The possible outcome of a case against a hypothetical board with a hypothetical non-default configuration is a little too ambiguous of a discussion for me. Why don't we stick to the subject.

Whether you think my argument is effective really isn't the point...it's up to whatever judge looks at it and with the wording you guys have used it would still stand...not every host has PHPMyAdmin installed...installing it would still be an active motion to get into the database....at any rate.

Whether your argument is effective is exactly the point. You keep comparing a piece of software that's used for database administration and happens to allow admins to read PM's with a piece of software designed for reading people's PM's. How do you not see the difference there?

Its funny how half or more of these arguements don't even apply when you are on private property or attending say a school....where'd the privacy go there? It's private property, both the software/forums and the server they are on. I didn't get any notice when I went to school that my freedom of speech rights were limited but they were, and are legally limited. I'll wait for the first court case to test this as I'd love to see some personal user try and sue a non commercial personal website owner over this.....I would LOVE it!

And of course bira destroyed that argument too, when she said:

For example, if a girl visits your home - your private home, which you own - and she goes to the bathroom, and later discovered that you secretly filmed her while she was taking a bath, she can sue you for violation of privacy, and she will win. The fact that the violation happened on your premises isn't relevant, and if anything makes you in the eyes of the law even more guilty, because you are abusing your rights as a host/service provider.

This isn't rocket science, JTMON. As you pointed out yourself, it all depends on how the specific laws are interpreted by the judge if someone decides to sue you for violating their privacy. It's up to you whether you want to err on the side of caution or stand firm by your "right" to do whatever you want with your board. I'm just pointing out that the smart thing to do is the former.