Paul,
 
> WD>The one here in Antwerp. These were the days of the court-case Helmut
> Hullen
> WD>vs. Ward Dossche which ran from somewhere 2000 till somewhere
> June-2002.
 
> OK, so local (to you) and may not be enforcible in other parts of the
> world.
 
That is correct, but:
 
1) This is the EU ... 24 countries ... except for Greece, Turkey and Cyprus
   they try to get along.
2) "Factual clubs" like the example with the group of bowlers or the Hell's
   Angels are very real everywhere around the globe. A single group of Boy
   Scouts for example overhere, and in quite a lot of other countries as
   well, consitutes a legal entity because it is a gathering of a group of
   individuals around a common cause where everybody is responsible with
   his/her own estate for legal issues. The same can be said about the legal
   status of churches and anything else that groups people around a common
   cause without formal incorporation.
 
Granted that the interpretation in every country can be different. However,
should it "anywhere" again come to a legal clash, then one of the
parties involved will reference the Antwerp-ruling to justify its
court-appearance and/or argumentation.
 
Little known to others but there has been another court-case here about
Fidonet-content which on the sidelines equally raised the issue of the
legal-standing of Fidonet. It was the case of Helmut Hullen versus Gisbert
Rudolph in Germany.
 
And to avoid any misconception about Helmut Hullen's subsequent
excommunication ... He has been admitted back in Fidonet in the meantime
and is again a sysop in good standing.
 
Take care,
 
 \%/{at}rd

--- D'Bridge 2.50