>a Playboy photo to one of the mainstream newsgroups I subscribe to.
>
>Suppose someone were to subpoena my computer with its Yarn files. I'd
>be doubly liable: 1) the photo is probably copyrighted; 2) the photo
>would probably be not acceptable under the Communications Decency Act
>(which is not being enforced until the Supreme Court rules, but which
>still *IS* the law).
1. If your real reason to get rid of this article is really a moral issue, then
I can understand your concern. However, if it really is a legal issue
you fear, you have nothing to worry about. Just don't try to sell it, okay?
The fair use clause in the Copyright act covers such things as this. As long
as you are not depriving anyone of income or claiming something is your
creation when it isn't, just possessing something like this isn't a crime.
2. You do understand that at this moment all you really have is a bunch
of text characters in a file. Until it is decoded it doesn't mean anything.
Nobody can look at it in its present state. If its uuencoded, it will be
decoded if you try to open it. If it is not, you will have to try to decode
it with another tool if that is your intent.
Personally, if it really bugged me for whatever reason,
I'd mark it as read, and go on reading the rest of the news. When done
I would expire -r the whole thing and forget about it. Consider writing kill/score
file that will prevent this type of thing. You can usually kill such stuff by noting
that such "articles" are often very large. So kill anything above say, 250 lines
of text.
____________________________________________________________
Jon F. Kaminsky
Principal Hydrogeologist
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
o Northwest Environmental Geoscience Co.
o 2522 North Proctor Street, Suite 135
o Tacoma, WA 98406