<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
    <id>http://www.cocomment.com/comments/rogben</id>
    <title>coComments related to rogben</title>
    <link rel="self" href="http://www.cocomment.com/comments/rogben"/>
    <rights>Copyright 2007 coComment.com</rights>
    <updated>2009-11-22T16:01:20.714+01:00</updated>
    <icon>http://www.cocomment.com/images/logo4rss.gif</icon>
    <entry>
        <id>http://www.cocomment.com/sidebar?object=people&amp;context=explore&amp;mode=detail&amp;id=rogben&amp;conv=1411160&amp;comment_id=26894711</id>
        <title>Conventional wisdom says that,</title>
        <author>
            <name>Roger</name>
        </author>
        <link rel="self" href="http://www.cocomment.com/sidebar?object=people&amp;context=explore&amp;mode=detail&amp;id=rogben&amp;conv=1411160&amp;comment_id=26894711"/>
        <content>Conventional wisdom says that, when it comes to a discussion forum, the owner has a license to reproduce a comment in the context of the discussion. Some (like me) prefer that to be an irrevocable license, since removing a comment distorts history.

At any rate, the blogger definitely doesn't *own* the comments... if she does, then she's not gonna qualify for the CDA's safe harbor provisions.</content>
        <published>2008-05-29T18:32:46.688+02:00</published>
        <updated>2008-05-29T18:32:46.688+02:00</updated>
    </entry>
</feed>
