W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2015

Re: Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-httpbis-legally-restricted-status

From: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 11:41:36 -0700
Message-ID: <CA+9kkMDCMWkxOQwOqcVWJ63ieUbL2CuAqfQnvCOGx5JtRXpB0w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 9:10 PM, Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz> wrote:

> On 30/09/2015 4:29 p.m., Mark Nottingham wrote:
>
> Section 1:
>
>  "for use when a server operator has a received a legal demand to deny
> access to a resource"
>
> This is a lot more restrictive than what I understood was being agreed
> to. This phrasing implies that a specific-URL DMCA type notice is
> required before the status may be used.
>
>
​For what it is worth, I did not read that to mean that the legal demand
was specific to a resource, merely that it covered a resource.  So, for
example, a blanket legal demand that all images containing a picture of the
King of country X be restricted from display outside of country X could
result in this status code being used, even if country X did not specify
each resource containing such a picture by URL.

​I think the current text is right, in other words, but I wouldn't object
to making a change that clarified it.  Perhaps:

"for use whenever a server operator has received a legal demand to deny
access to a resource or to a set of resources which includes the requested
resource."

I'm honestly not sure it's needed, but I think that would be harmless to
include.

regards,

Ted Hardie
(Not speaking for anyone here)​
Received on Wednesday, 30 September 2015 18:42:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:46 UTC