<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Yahoo Refuses Family Access to Slain Son&#8217;s Email</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.theinternetpatrol.com/yahoo-refuses-family-access-to-slain-sons-email/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.theinternetpatrol.com/yahoo-refuses-family-access-to-slain-sons-email/</link>
	<description>Internet Safety, Windows Updates, Internet News, and More</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 19:35:57 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: David Rittenhouse</title>
		<link>http://www.theinternetpatrol.com/yahoo-refuses-family-access-to-slain-sons-email/#comment-684</link>
		<dc:creator>David Rittenhouse</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Dec 2004 00:21:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=250#comment-684</guid>
		<description>Too bad that there is no mention of WHY the parents wanted their late son's emails...the natural sympathy everyone feels for a parent wishing to have one last glimpse into the final thoughts of their child might be diminished if it happened to be that their were additional motivations involved (such as if the parents were perhaps seeking information to support a lawsuit against a defense contractor for a fauilty product which didn't protect their son).  Grief and a desire for revenge (or greed) each generate different emotional responses to the parents, and without more details, I'd say Yahoo was right to uphold privacy.  Common sense dictates that if the son WANTED the info to go to the parents, he would have emailed it to them.  The fact that he didn't seems to indicate that his wishes were for them not to have it, and for Yahoo to do otherwise would be contrary to his last wishes.  Yahoo did the right thing...at least as far as the available information indicates.
--David</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Too bad that there is no mention of WHY the parents wanted their late son&#8217;s emails&#8230;the natural sympathy everyone feels for a parent wishing to have one last glimpse into the final thoughts of their child might be diminished if it happened to be that their were additional motivations involved (such as if the parents were perhaps seeking information to support a lawsuit against a defense contractor for a fauilty product which didn&#8217;t protect their son).  Grief and a desire for revenge (or greed) each generate different emotional responses to the parents, and without more details, I&#8217;d say Yahoo was right to uphold privacy.  Common sense dictates that if the son WANTED the info to go to the parents, he would have emailed it to them.  The fact that he didn&#8217;t seems to indicate that his wishes were for them not to have it, and for Yahoo to do otherwise would be contrary to his last wishes.  Yahoo did the right thing&#8230;at least as far as the available information indicates.<br />
&#8211;David</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fred Boness</title>
		<link>http://www.theinternetpatrol.com/yahoo-refuses-family-access-to-slain-sons-email/#comment-673</link>
		<dc:creator>Fred Boness</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Dec 2004 16:57:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=250#comment-673</guid>
		<description>This is what courts are for.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is what courts are for.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
