....I have been keeping in touch with sympathetic people in the CAF Administration and can assure you that ...
Well, hopefully they'll get the archive back.
Concerning legality, I won't say straightforward it's illegal, but if there is any brach there, it would be breach of copyright over posts published by users for years.
I'm not familiar with the copyright and litigation laws of U.S. to the extent I can offer a legal advice, but they are for sure bound by Universal and Bern Conventions on copyright.
Problems could arise regarding first owner of copyright in cases of pseudonyms, but Fr Ambrose (and Papa Ambrogio) were publishing under their real names, so that problem wouldn't apply to them. The breach is constituted by the fact that these posts vanished, and are not available to their authors, whom relied on their availability there once a post is published, unless the post violated any rule set by CAF. That would constitute a contract by adherence
(there are rules of internpretation of such by adherence
contracts by ICC, in favour of those whom adhered - i.e. the authors of the posts in this case). Or, the doctrine of breach of confidence
could apply to the case. The same breach of confidence, and perhaps even malicious falsehood doctrines could apply to our bannishment without the reference made available to the public. OUr goodwill has been infringed by it, and Fr Ambrose and Papa Ambrogio certainly do have to take care of their goodwill/reputation.
On these legal grounds, there is no need to launch a litigation before a competent US court, there is also possibility of much cheapear and faster WIPO arbitration, provided CAF agree.
Yet another problem could be the case of discrimination
, more particularly, religious discrimination
, which is against the Universal Declaration on Human Rights (UN, 1948). Namely, they wipped off the entire board and censored published posts, though nobody said we broke any rule CAF set
. They are entitled to do so, but making the archives unavailable, unlike in other cases
, makes possible copyright breach and violation of author's rights even worse. However, on these grounds the plaintiff would need a case before the court and WIPO arbitration wouldn't be appropriate.
Kindly note the above is neither legal advice, nor an opinion about if they did make any breach of violation, just a speculation about the applicable legal principles. But I do suggest to CAF members to consult their attorney before disregarding what's writen here.
Hopefully we'll see the archives back and nothing of the above will happen.