- Case Number: a20120117.1
- Status: closed
- Claimants: CAcert
- Respondents: Marek M, Marcus M
Initial Case Manager: UlrichSchroeter
Case Manager: MartinGummi
- Date of arbitration start: 2014-02-15
- Date of ruling: 2014-02-15
- Case closed: 2014-02-15
- Complaint: arbitration case against myself to remove mailing forwarded to public list
- Relief: TBD
Before: Arbitrator EvaStöwe (A), Respondent: Marek M(R1) Marcus M(R2), Claimant: CAcert(C), Case: a20120117.1
2012-01-17 (issue.c.o) case s20120117.7
- 2012-01-19 (iCM): added to wiki, request for CM / A
- 2014-02-15 (CM): I'll take care of this case and select Eva Stöwe as (A)
- 2014-02-15 (CM): send init mail to R1 and R2
- 2014-02-15 (A): send ruling
- 2014-02-15 (CM): close case
Original Dispute, Discovery (Private Part)
Link to Arbitration case a20120117.1 (Private Part)
EOT Private Part
Remains private, since it contains mostly private information. It is described in the discovery.
- Facts from the original dispute:
- R1 posted an answer to a question of a member to the public cacert-support mailing list, without due anonymization of private informations of the member.
- R2 asked R1 to file a dispute against himself so that the case could be handled and the mail deleted
- R1 filed this dispute
- R2 deleted the according mail from the mailing list and added this to the dispute
- Both respondents are support team members and acted as such.
- Both are known to have accepted CCA.
- Posting of the mail
- The post of the mail with disclosure of private information by R1 was not covered by an authorization of the user (this can be deducted from the mail itself) our policies or an arbitrator.
- Since R1 filed a dispute against himself without delay this does not look like an intended posting, so it has to be treated as an accident.
- As he initiated the dispute, he showed that he tried to rectify his error.
- Deletion of the mail
- Since the dispute was filed, a precedents case a20101025.1 - about when support may remove single posts to CAcert mailing lists - was ruled on.
- The named conditions of the precedents-ruling for an autorization of the delete action are:
- The original author of the post requests the removal of the post for a valid reason. Support personnel and mailing list owners decide whether a given reason is valid. Typical valid reasons include "accidental posting" and "disclosure of confident data".
- Anyone claims personal data concerning him-/herself is published in a posting, and the original author agrees the deletion of the post.
- R1 was the author of the mail and asked to delete it.
- R1 had no permission to post the mail, this is reason enough to delete it
- The first condition of the precedents case applies, so the precedent ruling should be followed.
- The posting of the mail on a public list by R1 was not authorized. But since it was a mistake and he directly initiated that the issue could be rectified, no action against him should be taken.
- The deletion of the mail by R2 matches the conditions of the ruling of the precedents case a20101025.1. This precedents case should be followed. The action to delete the mail is authorized.
-- Cologne, 2014-02-15
No execution needed.