Owen Blacker <owen...@pres.co.uk> wrote:

It's the "company's best interest" bit we are debating here - It is certainly in the company's best interest to prevent itself being sued. however, the *easiest* way to do this is to ban its users from doing anything at all - no email in or out, no usenet, no web browsing. There *has* to be a dividing line between doing everything possible to prevent the remotest possibility of a lawsuit, and allowing your customers to do whatever they like with no accountability - but in this case the dividing line is too far on the backside-covering side of the chart. They are *paid* to give legal advice on what is or isn't a risk to Demon's finances before they do things that could cause their customers to leave in flocks. This is obviously (to us, possibly not to them) a case where an american trade pressure group are quoting american rulings to a british company; correct procedure would be to send back the "does this apply outside of america" letter and receive a response BEFORE you start threatening your customers, on which your income depends. If Demon's lawyers can't keep up with global events like DeCSS, and can't decide to what extent the American Disney Protection Laws apply in england, it may be time for them to find a new set of lawyers.