Re: Google Groups

with <v6mggk$1tjtq$4@dont-email.me> Zen Cycle wrote:

On Wed, 10 Jul 2024 15:19:46 GMT, Tom Kunich <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:

*SKIP* [ 21 lines   3 levels deep]

This forces you to use commercial services.

>
Other usenet services are private for-profit. They are all
"commercial".  ES is a private non-profit _commercial_ service as
defined by the SCOTUS in a case called Tony and Susan Alamo Foundation
v. Secretary of Labor (1985) 471 U.S. 290, where a commercial service
is determined by a test of three questions:
>
1. Do the activities of the nonprofit serve the general public?
2. Does the nonprofit competes with other commercial enterprises?
3. Does the nonprofit derives an unfair advantage over others because it
does not have to comply with Wage & Hour Laws?

What're "Wage & Hour Laws"?

*SKIP* [  5 lines   1 level deep]

"in general, if a non-profit draws consumers from wide swaths of
society, and such consumers pay for services,

If "wide swaths of society" is understood as loose collection of
consumers for for-profit private services then -- does ES draws such
consumers?

especially when some practitioners at the nonprofit charge full fees
for some of the work they do,

I'm not certain that occasional voluntary donations constitute "full
fees for some of the work".

it would likely be difficult for the nonprofit to deny that it was a
“commercial enterprise.” On some level, it was competing with other
“commercial enterprises,” meaning private practices, professional
corporations, or even possibly other nonprofits in the area. "
Very clearly, ES.org qualifies as a commercial service

Then again, I wholehartedly agree that with definitions such as above
whatever is in spot-light is "private non-profit commercial service".
But!  Does ES withstand test?

p.s.  TK is still where he is.

p.p.s.  Email blacklisting is orthogonal can of worms.

--
Torvalds' goal for Linux is very simple: World Domination
Stallman's goal for GNU is even simpler: Freedom