From caf-talk Caf Nov 9 03:32:12 1992
From: evansmp@uhura.aston.ac.uk (Mark Evans)
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
Subject: Re: Preventing Sexual Harassment?
Message-ID: <1992Nov9.081209.10227@aston.ac.uk>
Date: 9 Nov 92 08:12:09 GMT
escheire@sunlab.cit.cornell.edu (Eric Scheirer) writes:
:
: Mark Evans (evansmp@uhura.aston.ac.uk) writes...
:
: > The problem appears to be that the laws are being implemented (if not written)
: > in such a way that getting people to sit down and talk to one another is made
: > more difficult (rather than easier).
: .
: .
: .
: > One thing, you could sue without having to ask her to do anything,
: > without even attempting to sort this out using any form of negotiation.
: > (also you can also sue anyone who attempts to tell you that talking with
: > either the individual concerned, their supervisor, an indenpendent
: > negotiator, might be a sensible course of action)
:
: Your postings seem to keep suggesting that all that is needed to take
: care of sexual (and implicitly, other harassment) is for the involved
: parties to sit down and have a good little chat.
:
: After all, we're all reasonable people here, aren't we?
The legal solution also works fine when the people involved are being reasonable.
:
: I don't think anyone here is denying that this is the best solution
: WHEN IT WORKS. The question is, what to do when it doesn't. Reasonable
: people can still disagree -- I can quite reasonably believe that
: my putting a racy GIF on my background window is protected speech; I
: also think it's reasonable that my (female) supervisor would find it
: bothersome.
:
: If she asked me, being who I am, I would most likely agree to take it down.
: But the issue at stake here is, what if I felt sufficiently strongly about
: my right to view such images that I refused? If no compromise can be reached,
: and if neither party will back down, one side must give in. Sometime, the
: question of "who should back down" must ultimately be settled in the courts.
:
However the way you have things set up, the powerfull presure groups make it
most likely that it will be the person being complaind about who will most
probably have to not only back down. But also be legally herassed and bullied
into doing so.
: I don't dispute in the least that U.S. society has become far too litigious,
: what with marriage contracts and multi-million "negligence" lawsuits, which
: I think is your implicit point. But I think your "let's be reasonable"
: argument gives short shrift to what I see as a very valid argument regarding
: constitutional conflict.
Well what to you surgest then.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Evans |evansmp@uhura.aston.ac.uk
+(44) 21 565 1979 (Home) |evansmp@cs.aston.ac.uk
+(44) 21 359 6531 x4039 (Office) |
From caf-talk Caf Nov 9 03:42:16 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,comp.admin.policy
From: evansmp@uhura.aston.ac.uk (Mark Evans)
Subject: Re: Preventing Sexual Harassment?
Message-ID: <1992Nov9.082435.10349@aston.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 08:24:35 GMT
martelli@cadlab.sublink.org (Alex Martelli) writes:
: jaw@owlnet.rice.edu (Joseph A. Watters) writes:
: ...
: :It is policy because it is the law regarding sexual harassment, not
: :harassment in general. The unwelcome behavior must be of a sexual
: :nature. In the case of sexual harassment complaints, the supervisor is
:
: I think you're missing a crucial point. This discussion, we should
: recall, started about the alleged "sexual harassment" nature of what a
: user chooses to display on hir windowed-screen background. If such
: choices, which are so obviously in the nature of free-speech
: expressions, are to be labeled "sexual harassment" under the "hostile
: environment" doctrine, then the "must be of a sexual nature" clause
: which you take as a given (and would make sense!) is NOT guaranteed AT
: ALL.
:
: If display of a scantily clad female body is "of a sexual nature",
: then why not the display of a scantily clad young male nailed to a
: cross and wearing a cross of thorns? Thus, no crucifixes allowed,
: I presume. Similarly for other religious depictions, such as naked
: Ishtar descending to Hell, Botticelli's Venus, Bosch's Inferno (LOTS
: of nudity there!), and so on and so forth.
Are there organised, loud, legal and powerful preasure groups trying to
outlaw the examples you give.
:
: And why stop at graphics? Isn't wearing a pink T-shirt emblazoned with
: "GAY, AND PROUD OF IT!" a similarly "sexual nature" behavior?
: Homophobes would certainly feel it unwelcome and hostile. And what if
: the message is "MY BODY, MY CHOICE!"? And the pink-shirt example which
: you were responding to is NOT as silly as you seem to imagine: a male's
: wearing pink, even without the accompanying words, IS taken (in certain
: circles) as a signal of out-of-the-closet homosexuality, a "sexual
: nature" message not that much different from the gay-liberation one
: mentioned above, or from displaying a Mapplethorpe photo on your
: office's wall, or on your workstation screen's background...
:
: The threshold, in my humble opinion, was crossed when it was conceded
: that a "free expression"-nature act, such as the choice of what to
: wear or what to display in one's personal working environment, was
: in any way equivalent to "harassing" somebody else sexually, with
: unwelcome sexual advances. This way bleakest censorship, dress codes,
: and tiranny lay...
The problem is as you say that the line already has been crossed, and those
who created the situation are going to do their best to uphold it.
(no matter what sort of daft situations it will lead to)
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Evans |evansmp@uhura.aston.ac.uk
+(44) 21 565 1979 (Home) |evansmp@cs.aston.ac.uk
+(44) 21 359 6531 x4039 (Office) |
From caf-talk Caf Nov 9 05:18:52 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: gbrown@Rosie.UH.EDU (G. Brown)
Subject: test
Message-ID: <1992Nov9.090112.21450@menudo.uh.edu>
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 09:01:12 GMT
From caf-talk Caf Nov 9 05:18:53 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: gbrown@Rosie.UH.EDU (G. Brown)
Subject: test
Message-ID: <1992Nov9.090145.21509@menudo.uh.edu>
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 09:01:45 GMT
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| "God is, as it were, the sewer into which |
| all contradictions flow" |
Gregory Brown | |
GBROWN@JETSON.UH.EDU | --G. W. F. Hegel |
| Lectures on the History of Philosophy |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From caf-talk Caf Nov 9 14:27:20 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: Re: Due process at state universities
Message-ID: <1992Nov9.192713.28998@eff.org>
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 19:27:13 GMT
nbc2134@dsacg2.dsac.dla.mil (Robert F Solon) writes:
[...]
>Steve:
> Believe me, I'm not belittling your case at all. I'm not "dismissing"
>the case as isolated. What I am saying is that so far no one has been able to
>come with eveidence to support Carl's far-reaching claims. Your above
>evidence is anecodtal; I would very much like to see some hard numbers. Can
>you provide them?
[...]
That it is impossible to get "hard numbers" about flaws in university
justice, is itself a serious flaw in university justice.
- Carl
--
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent EFF; this is just me.
=kadie@eff.org, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
From caf-talk Caf Nov 9 15:08:15 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [comp.admin.policy] Help - infgo needed on other student run computers
Message-ID:
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 19:52:24 GMT
[A repost - Carl]
From caf-talk Caf Nov 9 15:08:15 1992
Newsgroups: comp.admin.policy
Subject: Help - infgo needed on other student run computers
Date: 4 Nov 1992 17:38:54 GMT
Message-ID: <1d91reINNr66@uwm.edu>
Hi, I represent a student organized and administrated computer organization
for my campus - Univeristy of Wisconsin Milwaukee. We have currently been
petitioning for funds for a campus wide Unix server. The server would be
open to all faculty and students. It would be maintained and administeredby
our organization. It would be used from programming to entertainment to
being accessible to all the profesiional groups here.
The student association here wants us to gain information on other campus
organizations that have been able to do what we are trying to do.
Please mail me any info on how your groups are funded and organized. How
you gained the equipment, from whom, and any other quality information.
Thank you,
Perry Lea
Treasurer UBS
--
(( boottrax@csd4.csd.uwm.edu )) Basement Software Products ))
)) 'Keeping my opinions to myself' ((
(( Network Analysis - Systems Design - Software Engineering ))
)) Make a system foolproof, and only a fool will want to use it ((
--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
From caf-talk Caf Nov 9 16:10:20 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [news.sysadmin, et al.] a.b.p.e. distribution (was, Re: Does USENET condone CHILD PORNOGRAPHY?)
Message-ID:
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 21:02:13 GMT
[A repost - Carl]
From caf-talk Caf Nov 9 16:10:20 1992
Newsgroups: news.sysadmin,news.admin,news.admin.policy,alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.d
Subject: a.b.p.e. distribution (was, Re: Does USENET condone CHILD PORNOGRAPHY?)
Message-ID:
Date: 9 Nov 92 17:19:21 GMT
Man, that's some keyword list...
Here at the U of Washington, alt.sex.pictures (the forerunner of
alt.binaries.pictures.erotica) was removed from the feed for a
couple of reasons:
1) It's pornography! Tax dollars paying for pornography! Eeeeewwww!
I don't have a lot of sympathy for that line, actually...my tax
dollars pay for evil all over the world, why draw the line at
pictures of people with no clothes on?
2) Much or all of the material distributed in the group is copyright
material, distributed without permission of the author.
This argument, it seems to me, holds some weight. It would be, of
course, illegal to distribute copyright material without the permission
of the creator of the work. Elf's stories, for example, have been
posted by Elf. Fair enough. a.b.p.e. has recently contained, for
example, scans of Sports Illustrated swimsuit shots, I gather. This
is a no-no.
I think net.users (and certainly net.administrators) have to make
decisions on this matter: is it likely that their particular piece
of .net will disappear if they continue (or begin) to carry this
froup? Is it worth it to them/their users to run that risk? Here
the administrators argued, successfully, that we could lose large
chunks of network access as a consquence of carrying this a.s.p.;
it was deep-sixed. No complaint from me.
Josh Hayes
--
Josh Hayes, Quantitative Sciences HR-20 U of Washington
josh@mowgli.cqs.washington.edu 206 543-5004
We got a kinder, gentler, machine gun hand.
--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
From caf-talk Caf Nov 9 16:10:22 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [news.sysadmin, et al.] Re: a.b.p.e. distribution (was, Re: Does USENET condone CHILD PORNOGRAPHY?)
Message-ID:
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 21:02:45 GMT
[A repost - Carl]
From caf-talk Caf Nov 9 16:10:22 1992
Newsgroups: news.sysadmin,news.admin,news.admin.policy,alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.d
Subject: Re: a.b.p.e. distribution (was, Re: Does USENET condone CHILD PORNOGRAPHY?)
Message-ID:
Date: 9 Nov 92 18:44:11 GMT
I must be bored, following up my own posts, but apparently I was
mistaken. The reason actually given by the higher-ups at the UW
for removing a.b.p.e. was:
The picture groups take up waaaayyy too much disk space; we can't
afford them. We will, therefore, kill the entire a.b.p. hierarchy.
And they did.
Now, I suspect that reasons 1 and 2 as given in my previous post
are what really drove this decision, but maybe not. Hard to believe
that they couldn't just have put a pretty quick expire time on the
a.b.p. groups and let it go, but I guess they didn't want to.
Apologies if I misled anyone through my ignorance.
Josh
--
Josh Hayes, Quantitative Sciences HR-20 U of Washington
josh@mowgli.cqs.washington.edu 206 543-5004
We got a kinder, gentler, machine gun hand.
--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
From caf-talk Caf Nov 9 16:10:22 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [news.sysadmin, et al.] Re: a.b.p.e. distribution (was, Re: Does USENET condone CHILD
Message-ID:
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 21:03:05 GMT
[A repost - Carl]
From caf-talk Caf Nov 9 16:10:22 1992
Newsgroups: news.sysadmin,news.admin,news.admin.policy,alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.d
Subject: Re: a.b.p.e. distribution (was, Re: Does USENET condone CHILD
Message-ID: <1992Nov9.145214.19489@ms.uky.edu>
Date: 9 Nov 92 19:52:13 GMT
josh@cqs.washington.edu (Josh Hayes) writes:
>Now, I suspect that reasons 1 and 2 as given in my previous post
>are what really drove this decision, but maybe not. Hard to believe
>that they couldn't just have put a pretty quick expire time on the
>a.b.p. groups and let it go, but I guess they didn't want to.
A quick "du" of alt/binaries here (1k per block):
90 alt/binaries/sounds/misc
1 alt/binaries/sounds/erotica
169 alt/binaries/sounds/d
261 alt/binaries/sounds
10 alt/binaries/pictures/utilities
10 alt/binaries/pictures/tasteless
5367 alt/binaries/pictures/misc
5 alt/binaries/pictures/fractals
1 alt/binaries/pictures/fine-art/graphics
1 alt/binaries/pictures/fine-art/digitized
1 alt/binaries/pictures/fine-art/d
4 alt/binaries/pictures/fine-art
1 alt/binaries/pictures/erotica/male
1 alt/binaries/pictures/erotica/female
274 alt/binaries/pictures/erotica/d
1 alt/binaries/pictures/erotica/blondes
6697 alt/binaries/pictures/erotica
57 alt/binaries/pictures/d
12151 alt/binaries/pictures
1 alt/binaries/multimedia
12414 alt/binaries
This is on a monday with a two-day expiry time. Volume is always lower
after a weekend; that last number could easily hit 20 megs by friday.
(Not to mention the occasional volume surges. It's quite common to
receive over 5 megs in a.b.p.e in one day.)
There are whole hierarchies with less volume than
alt.binaries.pictures; misc for example only has 17 megs at the moment,
and we keep that for seven days (some of the groups for longer).
Don't judge your news admin until you've walked a mile in his shoes...
--
Kenneth Herron kherron@ms.uky.edu
University of Kentucky +1 606 257 2975
Dept. of Mathematics "Your ball goes over them, it sails off the edge into
a huge cauldren of fire-breathing dragons." "And they call this a par three?"
--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
From caf-talk Caf Nov 10 01:34:00 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,comp.admin.policy
From: karl@ddsw1.mcs.com (Karl Denninger)
Subject: Re: Preventing Sexual Harassment?
Message-ID:
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 05:22:06 GMT
In article <1992Nov06.143255.40060@wap.oau.org> bdixon@wap.oau.org (Bill Dixon) writes:
>In article kdenning@portal.hq.videocart.com (Karl Denninger) writes:
>>In article <1992Nov5.111253.29392@ms.uky.edu> morgan@ms.uky.edu (Wes Morgan) writes:
>>....
>>
>>I believe that since a student in this country is >required< to attend
>>school until age 16, the school therefore has a responsibility to protect
>>students against this kind (or any other kind) of harassment.
>>
>>....
>>
>>If you're going to require kids to attend a school, and force them to attend
>>a particular school at that (ie: no "choice") then it is incumbent on the
>>administration and staff of that school to maintain order. Those who offend
>>against that order should and must be removed.
>
>At the risk of branching too far away from the original issue (sexual
>harassment), I would like to say that you cannot say that a child is
>required to attend a particular public school. There are other options
>available. For instance, if you believe that attending the public school
>in your area is detrimental to the well-being (physical / emotional /
>educational) of your child(ren), you can always enroll them in a private
>school.
Non-issue really. Remove the tax burden that a parent (in fact, that we
all) pay for that school that we then THROW AWAY when you enroll in a
private school and I would agree with you.
However, since its my money that is going to fund that school, and yours as
well, I believe that the students have a right to a harassment-free
environment. Further, federal law on this matter agrees with me.
If the administration of a school is unwilling to take care of this matter,
then they deserve to find themselves on the wrong end of action of various
kinds.
>amounts of time and effort into it, but you cannot state categorically
>that children are to attend a particular school, whether it be
>public or private.
I can, however, say that I'm paying for that public school system and
therefore I am going to damn well get my money's worth. And that means a
safe and harassment-free environment -- even if I had to sue for it.
I think the idea of holding these folks' feet to the fire is a wonderful
idea.
--
Karl Denninger (karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM, !ddsw1!karl)
Data Line: [+1 312 248-0900] Anon. arch. (nuucp) 00:00-06:00 C[SD]T
Request file: /u/public/sources/DIRECTORY/README for instructions
From caf-talk Caf Nov 10 04:26:03 1992
Newsgroups: misc.legal,misc.misc,comp.org.eff.talk,misc.int-property,alt.censorship,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,alt.exotic-music,alt.emusic,alt.music.alternative
From: tsdavies@mothra.syr.EDU (T.S. Davies)
Subject: Crosley Bendix (Negativland) Discusses The Copyright Act
Message-ID:
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 23:22:39 EST
The following is the text of the compact disc accompanying
Negativland's publication, _The Letter U And The Numeral 2_, which
discusses the lawsuit filed against Negativland and SST Records by
Island Records, Warner-Chappell Music, and Casey Kasem.
It proposes a revision of the United States Copyright Act to allow the
reuse of portions of material released for public consumption. I have
given this article a fairly wide initial posting, with followups
directed to misc.int-property, which seems to be the most appropriate
group for discussion to take place in. If you change the followup
line to something obscure, I'd appreciate it if you'd let me know by
sending me e-mail -- I do read most of these groups regularly, and I
will be checking the rest for a while after posting this.
You may also want to change the distribution to something less
all-encompassing than "world". But I felt that there may be
sufficient international interest to justify an initial worldwide
posting.
I have no connection with the band, nor with any of the other
particpants in the lawsuits, outside of an interest in Negativland's
music, and interest in the copyright revision proposal presented here.
As this is a transcription, I am wholly responsible for any
typographical or grammatical errors in the text.
This message may be reproduced in any form whatsoever, with no
restrictions imposed on it by me. All copyright rights reversed.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transcript begins.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Negativland
_The Letter U And The Numeral 2_
"39. Crosley Bendix Discusses The Copyright Act"
(25'56" compact disc.)
ANNOUNCER: And now, Crosley Bendix, cultural reviewer and director of
stylistic premonitions for the Universal Media Netweb, with today's
Arts Review.
SAMPLE:
CROSLEY BENDIX: Good hello, again. While browsing through an
automated cassette dispenser at a Czechoslovakian airport recently, I
suddenly noticed a name I recognized among the wares -- mine!
There it was, Crosley Bendix. The title was, ah, uh, "This Affects
You," or something to that effect. And a closer inspection showed
this to be a bootleg cassette of some of my broadcasts. I suppose
they're out there right now, huddled around a squawking international
shortwave receiver in some filthy hut on Taiwan, taping everything I'm
saying on a low-end Payless cassette for volume two.
Well, even though I'm not getting a cent for the sales of those
bootlegs, the rules of this show don't allow me to complain. Yes, for
better or worse, this radio program, _Over The Edge_, and every form
of distorted sound it contains, always has been, and always will be,
in the public domain. Copyright free. Raw material for your reuse.
Here it is, week after week, available for duplication, remixing, or
editing of any kind, by anyone, for any reason. If you can find a way
to make a buck off anything you can capture off this radio show, go
right ahead, it's all yours, or anyone else's! No permission or
clearance of any kind is necessary, to do anything you want with _Over
The Edge_ broadcasts. I hope that's clear. Of course, you just can't
beat the studio air check compilations of _Over The Edge_ that
Negativland puts out, but, go ahead and try! There's just way too
much for them to ever get to, anyway.
So, here we are, a tiny but persistent island of free noise, with
unrestricted exploitation encouraged, in a vast salt sea of culture
now so choked and inhibited by copyright protections that the very
idea of mass culture is now primarily propelled by economic gain and
the rewards of ownership.
The lawyers behind the managers behind the artists have succeeded in
mining every possible vein of opportunity when it comes to the
monetary potential of art properties. And nowhere is this American
obsession for all-encompassing private ownership more perverse in its
effect on culture than in music.
True folk music, for instance, no longer exists. The original folk
music process of actually incorporating previous melodies and lyrics
as it evolved through time is no longer possible in modern societies,
where melodies and lyrics are privately owned.
Ah, yes, return with me now to those thrilling days of yesteryear,
before the present overabundance of law school graduates began
promoting more laws to entangle more people in order to pay their
upscale consumer bills. Before the practice of sharing in the use of
our culture became bought by corporations or withheld in private
hands. Before we went off the gold standard. Before Atlantis sank
and the survivors went to Egypt... No, that's too far. That would
throw me right into the incredibility of a different cultural review
we just don't have time for now. Well, never mind. Come back to the
present and let's start over. And that would be my suggestion to
Congress, as well.
And here is another thing I would suggest to Congress: It is now time
to drastically revise the outmoded copyright laws, particularly with
regard to the content of electronic media -- meaning anything that is
experienced via reproducing equipment the public possesses.
The revision of copyright protections is now necessary, because media
artists of every variety have long since left Congressional intentions
of cultural ownership in the rearview mirror. This, I believe, is as
it should be. But, in doing so, today's artists are driving their
sporty little art illegally. They can be pulled over and sent to
debtor's prison because their only license is an artistic one.
Yet these vehicles of appropriation present no menace of any kind to
the general population. The only supposed threat is to the
unsatisfiable greed of an extreme minority of private cultural owners.
The reason for today's repressive cultural traffic laws is based
purely on economic control, and, as such, serves to keep many artists
off roads they need to be exploring. The significant urge to
incorporate found sound into contemporary music, for instance, is now
in virtual gridlock -- on the way to a drawbridge that's always up.
We should be giving our artists a wide open freeway through an
environment full of media influences, but this route is being
aggressively denied by "art cops" working for the self-serving
marketing system that has imposed itself on culture.
What am I driving at? The undeniable wisdom of letting artists -- not
business interests -- determine what art will consist of. The need
for various arts of appropriation should be obvious. Artists have
always seen the entire world around them as both inspiration to act
and as raw material to mold and remold. For most of this century,
artists, like everyone else, have been subject to a growing media
environment. Today, we are surrounded with canned ideas, images, and
sounds. My television set told me that seventy to eighty percent of
the population now gets most of their information about the world from
their television set! Large increments of our daily perceptions are
not supplied by the physical reality around us but by the media that
saturates it. Both the content and the programming techniques of
electronic media have inspired the current art trends of
appropriation, but it's nothing new.
Any serious observer of modern music can cite a multitude of examples
-- from Buchanan and Goodman's humorous collages of song fragments in
the fifties to today's canonization of James Brown samples -- wherein
artists have incorporated the actual property of others into their own
unique creations. The whole histories of folk music and the blues are
typified by creative theft. Jazz and rock are full of this, too. In
the visual arts, there is a longstanding tradition of found image
collage, from Schwitters and Braque to Rauschenberg and Warhol. This
is a twentieth century mode of artistic operation that is now nothing
short of dramatic in its proliferation, in spite of all the
marketplace laws designed to prohibit it.
It is important to note that this mode of operation has continued to
grow in artistic relevance as its major source of inspiration -- the
media environment -- has continued to grow. Appropriation isn't
limited to any medium, and it doesn't fade away as mere styles do.
Appropriation's major jump from visual work to audio work in recent
years only underlines the emotional relevance of the technique.
What's going on here? I believe it has to do with deep stuff like
media saturation and the opportunity for self-defense against media
coercion that appropriation engenders. It also has to do with the
Surrealist/Dada concept of detournement. In modern terms,
appropriation is often about culture jamming -- capturing the
corporately-controlled subjects of the one-way media barrage,
reorganizing them to be a comment upon themselves, and spitting them
back into the barrage for cultural consideration. A sometimes nasty
(but wholly appropriate) response to a society in decline and denial.
At the very least, appropriators are claiming the right to create with
mirrors.
Corporate culture is trying to reach the end of this century
maintaining their skewed view that there is something wrong with all
this. But, perceptually and philosophically, it is an uncomfortable
wrenching of common sense to deny that once something hits the
airwaves, it is literally in the public domain. The fact that the
owners of culture and its material distribution are able to claim this
isn't true is a tribute to their ability to restructure common sense
for maximum profit.
But art is what artists do, and we can only hope for laws that
recognize this. Just as the dictionary recognizes new words -- even
slang -- that come into common usage. Until then, we are stuck with
copyright laws which were designed solely by publishing interests and
cultural manufacturers who maintain virtually unopposed lobbyists in
Congress to ensure that their present stranglehold on the reuse of
culture will remain intact. These cultural representors claim to be
upholding the interests of artists in the marketplace. And Congress
-- with no exposure to an alternative point of view -- always
accommodates them.
A more generous and enlightened approach to copyright law would have
it prohibit straight-across bootlegging, provide cover version
royalties, and practically nothing else. Virtually all the volumes of
statutes which now go far beyond this are not only unnecessary, but
counterproductive to the now common practice of piecemeal
appropriation in the creation of new work.
The crucial difference between simply bootlegging entire works in
order to profit from someone else's creativity and the creation of new
work which incorporates elements of existing work for the referential
or commentary effects thus produced must be made clear to lawmakers.
The present "broad brush" of copyright law is acting to censor what
artists want to do. Not a desirable role for government.
Culture is more than commerce. The law should begin to acknowledge
the artistic domain of various creative techniques which may actually
conflict with what others claim to be their economic domain. Art
needs to acquire an equal footing with marketers in court. The
question that must rise to the surface of legal consciousness now is:
At what point in the process of found fragment appropriation does the
new creation possess its own unique identity, which supersedes the sum
of its parts, thus gaining its own right to legally exist?
The media and electronic publishing industry's argument that
appropriation equals ripoff is truly irrelevant. Unlike bootlegging,
appropriation in no way prevents an artist from profiting from his or
her own work through every form of sale which would normally occur.
Beyond that, it is only greed and opportunism which assumes that
others' partial or fragmented use of that work -- being no part of the
original artist's efforts -- should additionally profit that artist.
It is simply unearned gravy, existing only because of another's
efforts to begin with.
A revamping of copyright laws envisions a more free-wheeling and
referentially unconstricted art world. This, of course, would be a
lawyer's nightmare of lost work and layoffs. But for the culture at
large, it would be a vast improvement. For instance: if you are
making a movie and want to use a section of a song in the soundtrack,
you wouldn't need to clear it and you wouldn't need to pay the artist.
You would be free to put that fragment in your work whether it appears
to be a favorable context to the publisher or the artist or not.
However, if you wanted to use the entire song in your movie -- a
complete self-contained creation by another -- or put out a soundtrack
album with the complete song on it, then you would need to clear it
with the artist and pay royalties. The difference between referencing
a fragment of a publically available cultural artifact, and presenting
that artifact as a complete and self-contained performance should be
the defining guideline for artist profit.
In such a world, when an artist releases his or her work for public
consumption, they would not only receive the benefit of public sales;
they would also give up what now amounts to undeserved control over all
forms of public use of that material. If they want to operate in the
"public domain," those would be the consequences.
To say that artists and their companies and their companies' lawyers
would suffer some kind of devastating economic hardship by the loss of
all this second-hand, uninitiated income from outside sources is no
longer tolerable when our very process of cultural evolution is now so
straightjacketed by opportunistic claims of ownership that it amounts
to censorship.
Art is not defined as a business. Let me repeat that: Art is not
defined as a business. The reuse of culture should be encouraged, not
inhibited and litigated.
Today, our entrenched copyright, publishing, and cultural property
laws stand as a monument to private greed. They need to be brought,
kicking and screaming, into our real world of modern capturing
technology and find a comfortable accord with the artist's healthy and
inevitable impulse to incorporate public influences.
Well, by now you're probably saying, "Wait a minute, Mr. B! This
thing has turned into some kind of totally serious manifesto, grant
proposal sort of thing. I didn't pay top dollar for this bootleg in
order to get a lecture. Aren't you supposed to be funny, sort of?"
Well, I am, sort of. And that's my very next
point. Appropriation, by its very nature, often results in something
funny. And funny can be just as important in life and culture and art
as all that serious stuff that will get you ideological followers or a
grant. Let's find out by putting aside all this theoretical rhetoric,
and turning to the experiential reality of what I may or may not be
describing. I have here a, ah, a demonstration tape. An example of
found sound appropriation and transformation. And here it is:
[4'48" of assorted cut-together pieces of tape deleted]
Okay, that's it. I call this a razor tape, because it's made with
only a razor blade. Quite laborious, sort of interesting. Eh, not
the greatest thing you've ever heard, maybe, but kind of funny in a
confused sort of way. Ha. Maybe it's not finished, I really can't
tell. It seems to be made out of, ah -- commercials? Yes, but they're
all mixed up and it's no longer selling anything. So what's it about
now? Anything? Of course! It's about all the things I've been
talking about. But how? What's the purpose? Well, I purposely chose
this tape because it lacks any obvious pretensions to social
significance. This tape is not going to deflect our national
obsession with the worship of consumerism, even though it's a twist on
some of the prayers; it's not going to inspire any moral revelations
among corporate policymakers, investment bankers, or politicians; it's
not going to put an enthusiasm for the democratic process back into
our population. But, maybe even this little effort at nonsense is
worthwhile in some less-definable way, and deserves to exist for less
predictable reasons. Yet, this little razor tape is entirely illegal
and is not supposed to exist at all, without the permission of the
people who made the original ads.
Do you think they would have given their permission to do this with
their material? Do you think the creators of the original ads should
be paid, again, by me, for what I did with their work? Do you think
you could have heard it today if I had to find them and wait for their
clearance before I could play it? Do you think you could hear it by
next year? The year after that?
The answer to all these questions is: "No." There is no way to
make this humorous little tape-edit legally. And there is no way for
you to hear it legally. Yet, I did, and you did. I think no harm was
done. What do you think?
There are so many musicians and audio artists who are now actively
engaged in various degrees of found sound appropriation that it would
run me right off the end of this tape to name them all. Oh, let's
see, just one group that comes to the top of my mind is, ah,
Negativland, perhaps you've heard of them? But, ah, anyway, it's
obvious that appropriation is here to stay, as the ranks of outlaws
continues to grow. The composing of found sound materials will
continue -- outside existing law -- regardless of threats and lawsuits
and corporate attorneys' retainers, because, it is, of all things,
just plain interesting. And for artists, the power of interesting
will not be denied.
On behalf of all these creative spirits -- the pirate guardians of
what's left of public consciousness -- this is Crosley Bendix, urging
you, whether you make art, or are in the position of protecting it --
please -- ignore unreasonably restrictive copyright protections.
Because, if the owners of culture do not see the need to encourage a
creative climate in which artists are free to do whatever interests
them, America's epitaph will probably be chiseled in legalese.
SAMPLE:
What do you want on your Tombstone?
Man: I wrote those ads.
Another man: Mm-hmm.
Man: I wrote them.
Yet another man: And the
picture of me was not a picture I gave them, it was a violation of
copyright laws, because they copied it on their VTR machine, with an
off-air feed, it appears...
ANNOUNCER:
You've been listening to cultural reviewer and social critic Crosley
Bendix.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transcript ends.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
For more information:
--------------------
The United States Copyright Act is available on-line via a Gopher
server at fatty.law.cornell.edu. The following lines, added to your
~/.gopherrc file, will allows quick access via bookmarks.
Type=1
Name=Copyright Act
Path=1/lii/copyright/chapter01
Host=fatty.law.cornell.edu
Port=70
Negativland can be contacted at:
Negativland
1920 Monument Boulevard. MF-1
Concord, CA 94520
510-420-0469 FAX
_The Letter U And The Numeral 2_ should be available from various good
music and bookstores, on the current Knitting Factory Tour, and from:
Negativmailorderland
109 Minna #391
San Francisco, CA 94105
--
Sam Hill Cabal, DS tsdavies@mailbox.syr.edu
"It don't matter, Sail, ... Could be worse. The fam'ly might be donatin' the
proceeds to the Cath'lic Church, or the Mormons or somethin'. One cult's the
same as another." -- Lula Pace Ripley, in "Consuelo's Kiss".
From caf-talk Caf Nov 10 08:15:50 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: morgan@engr.uky.edu (Wes Morgan)
Subject: [NOT A REPOST] Re: [news.sysadmin, et al.] Re: a.b.p.e. distribution
Message-ID: <1992Nov10.81210.8239@ms.uky.edu>
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 13:12:10 GMT
[ All newsgroups deleted except alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk -- Wes ]
kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) wrote:
>[A repost - Carl]
Yup, and quite a few of them at that........
Please, please, PLEASE, can't you just say "there's an interesting discussion
over in news.sysadmin; check it out"??!!
It gets rather annoying to see articles two and three times, thanks to
such reposting; I'd say that 'spreading the discussion' in this fashion
actually performs a disservice, given readers' propensity for chopping
Newsgroups lines.....
It's also rather annoying to see only a few articles in a thread; we then
almost always have to go searching for its conclusion elsewhere. This is
another reason to provide pointers to discussion (instead of reposts of
discussion). This has the added benefit of concentrating the discussion
(as best we can) in the original group; our opinions will reach more people,
and we'll all become widely-respected, honored net.legends. 8)
Seriously, though, I'd like to think that the majority of readers are able
to find their way to news.sysadmin; it isn't that difficult, and most sites
carry it. (In this case, more sites carry news.sysadmin than carry alt.comp.
acad-freedom.talk, but we're reposting to the smaller group with the poorer
distribution!)
--
MORGAN@UKCC | Wes Morgan | ...!ukma!ukecc!morgan
morgan@ms.uky.edu | Engineering Computing | morgan@wuarchive.wustl.edu
morgan@engr.uky.edu | University of Kentucky | JWMorgan@dockmaster.ncsc.mil
Mailing list for AT&T StarServer S/E - starserver-request@engr.uky.edu
From caf-talk Caf Nov 10 10:29:35 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [comp.org.eff.talk] right to have .plan
Message-ID: <1992Nov10.152927.15405@eff.org>
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 15:29:27 GMT
[A repost - Carl]
From caf-talk Caf Nov 10 10:29:35 1992
From: moon@Virginia.EDU (M. Yi)
Subject: right to have .plan
Message-ID: <1992Nov8.201311.16762@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 20:13:11 GMT
recently i recieve a complaint about my .plan file
which contains quote from the book of isaiah. one
user in my system accuses, "[i was] protelyzing over
system." i consider this as a challege in my freedom
of expressing my thought and freedom of religion.
is it freedom of speech valid in cyberworld?
since this is not a whole complaint, but a part of it,
administator's action might be irrelavant to this
issue. but i don't want to take disadvantage of
loosing my right to expressing faith through .plan.
because of my other faults.
munho yi
moon@virginia.edu
--
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent EFF; this is just me.
=kadie@eff.org, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
From caf-talk Caf Nov 10 10:29:43 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [comp.org.eff.talk] Re: right to have .plan
Message-ID: <1992Nov10.152936.15446@eff.org>
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 15:29:36 GMT
[A repost - Carl]
From caf-talk Caf Nov 10 10:29:43 1992
From: colinj@engin.umich.edu (Colin Johnson)
Subject: Re: right to have .plan
Message-ID: <=NB=N#A@engin.umich.edu>
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 92 18:50:45 EST
My first reaction to this is that anyone who looks at you .plan
file does so by choice.
Colin J.
--
Colin Johnson |Colin.Johnson@um.cc.umich.edu
Ann Arbor Michigan |colinj@caen.engin.umich.edu
--
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent EFF; this is just me.
=kadie@eff.org, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
From caf-talk Caf Nov 10 10:29:49 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [comp.org.eff.talk] Re: right to have .plan
Message-ID: <1992Nov10.152942.15489@eff.org>
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 15:29:42 GMT
[A repost - Carl]
From caf-talk Caf Nov 10 10:29:49 1992
From: cb@wixer.cactus.org (Cyberspace Buddha)
Subject: Re: right to have .plan
Message-ID: <1992Nov10.035821.9440@wixer.cactus.org>
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 03:58:21 GMT
moon@Virginia.EDU (M. Yi) writes:
>recently i recieve a complaint about my .plan file
>which contains quote from the book of isaiah. one
>user in my system accuses, "[i was] protelyzing over
>system." i consider this as a challege in my freedom
>of expressing my thought and freedom of religion.
>
A complaint about your .plan? seems kinda far fetched to me.
were I a sysadmin and got such a complaint, I'd tell the plaintiff
to go whistle up a rope. After all, how do you get to see a
persons .plan, anyway? is there a way other than finger? If
not, I'd say that fingering someone and then whining about
the results is kinda begging the question...
cb
--
Cyberspace Buddha { Why are you looking for more knowledge when you } /(o\
cb@wixer.cactus.org } do not pay attention to what you already know? { \o)/
Is this thing on? { Just say no to war, Bush, NSA, CIA, IRS, etc... } fnord
--
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent EFF; this is just me.
=kadie@eff.org, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
From caf-talk Caf Nov 10 10:59:31 1992
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: Re: right to have .plan
Message-ID: <1992Nov10.155923.16268@eff.org>
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 15:59:23 GMT
moon@Virginia.EDU (M. Yi) writes:
>recently i recieve a complaint about my .plan file
>which contains quote from the book of isaiah. one
>user in my system accuses, "[i was] protelyzing over
>system." i consider this as a challege in my freedom
>of expressing my thought and freedom of religion.
>is it freedom of speech valid in cyberworld?
[...]
At a state university such as U. of Virginia, freedom of expression is
protected even on/within University resources. People who don't care
for your .plan can easily ignore or avoid it, just as they can easily
ignore or avoid a "Quad Preacher" for whom the do no care.
- Carl
ANNOTATED REFERENCES
(All these documents are available on-line. Access information follows.)
=================
caf
=================
* About the CAF mailing lists (and newsgroups)
A description to the comp-academic-freedom-talk mailing list. It is a
free-forum for the discussion of questions such as: How should general
principles of academic freedom (such as freedom of expression, freedom
to read, due process, and privacy) be applied to university computers
and networks? How are these principles actually being applied? How can
the principles of academic freedom as applied to computers and
networks be defended?
=================
law/constraints.constitutional
=================
* Constitution -- Public University -- Constraints
Comments from _A Practical Guide to Legal Issues Affecting College
Teachers_ by Partrica A. Hollander, D. Parker Young, and Donald D.
Gehring. (College Administration Publication, 1985). Discusses the
constitutional constraints on public universities including the
requires for freedom of expression, freedom against unreasonable
searches and seizures, due process, specific rules.
=================
law/clergy-v-chicago-board-of-ed
=================
* Expression -- On Campus -- Clergy v. Chicago Board of Ed
Excerpt from the ACLU Handbook _The Rights of Students_ 3rd Edition,
1988 about access to school facilities by students and outsiders. It
says if use by students is not disruptive, use should be allowed.
Also, "if any facility is made available to one group, the school may
not then deny other groups the opportunity to use that facility."
=================
law/tinker_v_des_moines.2
=================
* Expression -- On Campus -- Tinker v. Des Moines -- 2
A few excerpts from the majority decision in _Tinker v. Des Moines
Independent Community School District_ (1969). It concerned
non-disruptive political expression in schools. The Supreme Court held
that two students had the right to wear black armbands to school as a
protest against the Vietnam War.
=================
law/widmar-v-vincent
=================
* Expression -- On Campus -- Widmar v. Vincent
An excerpt from _The Rights of Religious Persons in Public Education_ by
John W. Whitehead summarizing how the Supreme Court case of Widmar v. Vincent
established that public university campuses are limited public forums.
=================
law/perry-v-perry
=================
* Expression -- Public Forum -- Campus Mail -- Perry v. Perry
Comments from the ACLU Handbook _The Rights of _Teachers_. It says
that campus mail systems (and other school facilities) can be limited
public forums. (Perry v. Perry was about an interschool mail system.
It was one of the cases that defined the Public Forum Doctrine.)
Also, a paraphrase from an ACLU handbook _The Rights of Teachers_. It
says that generally, speech, if otherwise shielded from punishment by
the First Amendment, does not lose that protection because its tone is
sharp.
Also, from p. 92, it says that there are legal limits to the oaths a
(public) school can ask its teachers to sign. [Some of these same
limits might apply to what a school can ask a user to sign as a
condition of getting (or keeping) a computer account.]
=================
law/stanley-v-magrath
=================
* Expression -- Public Forum -- Closing -- Stanley v. Magrath
Comments from _Public Schools Law: Teachers' and Students' Rights_ 2nd
Ed. by Martha M. McCarthy and Nelda H. Cambron-McCabe, published in
1987 by Allyn and Bacon, Inc. It says, in part, "[a]lthough school
boards are not obligated to support student papers, if a given
publication was originally created as a free speech forum, removal of
financial or other school board support can be construed as an
unlawful effort to stifle free expression." Also, "school
authorities cannot withdraw support from a student publication simply
because of displeasure with the content" and "the content of a
school-sponsored paper that is established as a medium for student
expression cannot be regulated more closely than a nonsponsored
paper". Also, it tells what to do about libel in student
publications.
=================
law/wiesenthal-center-v-mccalden
=================
* Expression -- Public Forum -- Closing -- Wiesenthal Center v. McCalden
UPI article about Supeme Court case 91-1643, _The Simon Wiesenthal
Center for Holocaust Studies, et al., vs. Viviana McCalden, as
administrator of the estate of David McCalden_.
"The Supreme Court Monday let stand a decision that the city of Los
Angeles and a number of private organizations can be sued for
allegedly conspiring to ensure the cancellation of a scheduled speech
by a ``Holocaust revisionist.''"
=================
law/san-diego-committee-v-gov-bd
=================
* Expression -- Public Forum -- Overview -- San Diego Committee v. Gov Bd
Excerpts from San Diego Committee v. Governing Bd., 790 F.2d 1471. A
decision by an appellate court that applied the Supreme Court's Public
Forum Doctrine (to a school newspaper).
=================
=================
If you have gopher, you can browse the CAF archive with the command
gopher gopher.eff.org
These document(s) are also available by anonymous ftp (the preferred
method) and by email. To get the file(s) via ftp, do an anonymous ftp
to ftp.eff.org (192.88.144.4), and get file(s):
pub/academic/caf
pub/academic/law/constraints.constitutional
pub/academic/law/clergy-v-chicago-board-of-ed
pub/academic/law/tinker_v_des_moines.2
pub/academic/law/widmar-v-vincent
pub/academic/law/perry-v-perry
pub/academic/law/stanley-v-magrath
pub/academic/law/wiesenthal-center-v-mccalden
pub/academic/law/san-diego-committee-v-gov-bd
To get the file(s) by email, send email to archive-server@eff.org.
Include the line(s) (be sure to include the space before the file
name):
send acad-freedom caf
send acad-freedom/law constraints.constitutional
send acad-freedom/law clergy-v-chicago-board-of-ed
send acad-freedom/law tinker_v_des_moines.2
send acad-freedom/law widmar-v-vincent
send acad-freedom/law perry-v-perry
send acad-freedom/law stanley-v-magrath
send acad-freedom/law wiesenthal-center-v-mccalden
send acad-freedom/law san-diego-committee-v-gov-bd
--
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent EFF; this is just me.
=kadie@eff.org, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
From caf-talk Caf Nov 10 11:16:43 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: Re: [NOT A REPOST] Re: [news.sysadmin, et al.] Re: a.b.p.e. distribution
Message-ID: <1992Nov10.161634.16537@eff.org>
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 16:16:34 GMT
morgan@engr.uky.edu (Wes Morgan) writes:
[...]
>Please, please, PLEASE, can't you just say "there's an interesting discussion
>over in news.sysadmin; check it out"??!!
[...]
I reposted those three articles because they provided new information
and speculation about the removal of newsgroups at the U. of
Washington.
>It gets rather annoying to see articles two and three times, thanks to
>such reposting;
You should see the articles at most two times. I reposted only to
alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk. The reposted article are marked to help
you avoid reading them even a second time.
[...]
>(In this case, more sites carry news.sysadmin than carry alt.comp.
>acad-freedom.talk, but we're reposting to the smaller group with the poorer
>distribution!)
[...]
Although news.sysadmin has wider distribution, it does not have the
same distribution. Almost 400 people read CAF-Talk and CAF-News via
mailing lists. Moreover, CAF-Talk is archived, digested, abstracted,
etc., while news.sysadmin is not.
- Carl
--
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent EFF; this is just me.
=kadie@eff.org, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
From caf-talk Caf Nov 10 11:45:41 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [comp.admin.policy, et al.] Re: What about child pornography?
Message-ID:
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 16:21:19 GMT
[A repost - Carl]
From caf-talk Caf Nov 10 11:45:41 1992
Newsgroups: comp.admin.policy,news.admin.policy
Subject: Re: What about child pornography?
Message-ID: <159@ima.com>
Date: 10 Nov 92 08:26:08 GMT
In article john@iastate.edu (John Hascall) writes:
> How about this amazingly radical concept...
>
> If something is illegal for your site, you delete it from your site.
How about another amazingly radical concept...
Most sites (or at least those not part of .edu) are around for reasons other
than to just support news, and their admins perform news administration as
a peripheral activity. To monitor every single image that goes through a
site with a full alt feed is a *very* significant resource in time, one in
which most companies will not be able to cost justify. I doubt that all
administrators will be dying to spend all their waking non-billable hours
monitoring this stuff just to make sure they did not miss some illegal posting.
Lets get real about this - either we are able to police ourselves, or several
(many?) sites will join the ranks of those banning the erotic picture groups
from their sites. Only this time, those choosing to censor the groups will
be doing so due to the legal implications of carrying the traffic, not
necessarily because of how they feel toward the actual images posted. There
will not be any facist admins to blame this time around - only those foolish
posters that could not control what they posted.
Regards,
Tim Kehres
--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
From caf-talk Caf Nov 10 12:02:08 1992
Newsgroups: comp.admin.policy,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: Re: What about child pornography?
Message-ID:
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 16:29:49 GMT
kehres@ima.com (Tim Kehres) writes:
[...]
>Most sites (or at least those not part of .edu) are around for reasons other
>than to just support news, and their admins perform news administration as
>a peripheral activity. To monitor every single image that goes through a
>site with a full alt feed is a *very* significant resource in time, one in
>which most companies will not be able to cost justify
[...]
The law seems to say that you are not reponsible for the distribution
of material that can't and don't know about. (Without such law the
First Amendment is almost worthless.)
- Carl
ANNOTATED REFERENCES
(All these documents are available on-line. Access information follows.)
=================
law/cubby-v-compuserv
=================
* Expression -- Liability -- Cubby v. Compuserv
Report of a federal district court case which said CompuServe could
not be held liable for the defamatory content because it exercised no
editorial control.
=================
law/student-publications.misc
=================
* Expression -- Offensive -- Student Publications -- Misc
Quotes from the book _Law of the Student Press_ by the Student Press
Law Center (1985,1988). They say that four-letter words are protected
speech, that public universities are not likely to be liable for
publications that they for which they do not control the contents, and
that the _Hazelwood_ decision does not apply to universities.
=================
=================
If you have gopher, you can browse the CAF archive with the command
gopher gopher.eff.org
These document(s) are also available by anonymous ftp (the preferred
method) and by email. To get the file(s) via ftp, do an anonymous ftp
to ftp.eff.org (192.88.144.4), and get file(s):
pub/academic/law/cubby-v-compuserv
pub/academic/law/student-publications.misc
To get the file(s) by email, send email to archive-server@eff.org.
Include the line(s) (be sure to include the space before the file
name):
send acad-freedom/law cubby-v-compuserv
send acad-freedom/law student-publications.misc
--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
From caf-talk Caf Nov 10 14:22:14 1992
Newsgroups: comp.admin.policy,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: jbotz@mtholyoke.edu (Jurgen Botz)
Subject: Re: What about child pornography?
Message-ID:
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 19:14:15 GMT
In article kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
>The law seems to say that you are not reponsible for the distribution
>of material that can't and don't know about. (Without such law the
>First Amendment is almost worthless.)
Yes, but will that prevent the FBI or USSS from seizing all my computer
equipment as evidence should they decide to crack down on those who
distribute illegal pronography or other illegal material via the
computer networks?
--
Jurgen Botz | Internet: JBotz@mtholyoke.edu
Academic Systems Consultant | Bitnet: JBotz@mhc.bitnet
Mount Holyoke College | Voice: (US) 413-538-2375 (daytime)
South Hadley, MA, USA | Snail Mail: J. Botz, 01075-0629
From caf-talk Caf Nov 10 21:37:07 1992
From: betsys@cs.umb.edu (Elizabeth Schwartz)
Newsgroups: comp.admin.policy,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
Subject: Re: What about child pornography?
Message-ID:
Date: 11 Nov 92 00:37:58 GMT
In my case, I feel literally in the middle because we DO feed some
sites, and some of my users HAVE complained about child pornography in
the alt.binaries.pictures.groups. We're not doing anything about it
but it makes me really uncomfortable. As the previous posters have
pointed out, we have no ability to screen EVERY message...screening
message would only have some effect if a lot of sites did it.
Of course, there will always be some site which dumps material, if
only to test the limits or to prove that they can. However, it doesn't
seem right to be told about the child pornography and just ignore it.
We definitely want to keep the binaries groups...they are popular
and may help ""sell" the service. I can't work up much enthusiasm for
defending the groups if they are going to contain child pornography
though. I know, there's a problem determining what is pornography, and
whether pictures used real children or were altered or faked.
Still...I wish the stuff wasn't here
...still wondering....
Betsy
--
System Administrator Internet: betsys@cs.umb.edu
MACS Dept, UMass/Boston BITNET:ESCHWARTZ%UMBSKY.DNET@NS.UMB.EDU
100 Morrissy Blvd Staccato signals
Boston, MA 02125-3393 of constant information....
From caf-talk Caf Nov 11 00:04:45 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [news.sysadmin, et al.] Re: Contraband data on the Net (again)
Message-ID:
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 04:33:29 GMT
[A repost - Carl]
From caf-talk Caf Nov 11 00:04:45 1992
From: nagle@netcom.com (John Nagle)
Subject: Re: Contraband data on the Net (again)
Message-ID: <1992Nov10.192754.847@netcom.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 19:27:54 GMT
jbotz@mtholyoke.edu (Jurgen Botz) writes:
>And that being the case, under
>current precedent, certain federal law enforcement agencies can come
>to every single Net site and seize every piece of electronic
>equipment there. Yes, this includes YOU, even if your site is at
>a powerful large corporation or major university. Admittedly, it's
>not very likely, but it is possible, and it HAS HAPPENED. Sites
>that were Netnews and UUCP nodes have been seized by the secret
>service as "evidence" in cases involving "stolen" data,
This is a gross exaggeration. For a while back in 1990, there
were indeed problems like this. But after much legal and political
effort, they have been mostly resolved. The two prosecutors most
active in such activities (Cook and Thackary) lost their jobs.
The Secret Service agents involved are being sued in Federal court.
(Steve Jackson Games vs various persons). The Sturges case in San
Francisco ended up being a big political embarassment for the FBI.
Read "The Hacker Crackdown" and get up to date.
We may see seizures incident to felony arrests, but I don't
think that at least Federal law enforcement will do any more BBS seizures
unless they have a good chance of a felony conviction.
John Nagle
--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
From caf-talk Caf Nov 11 00:59:25 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,comp.org.eff.talk
From: john@iastate.edu (John Hascall)
Subject: Re: [comp.org.eff.talk] Re: right to have .plan
Message-ID:
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 05:29:55 GMT
}[A repost - Carl]
}Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
}From: colinj@engin.umich.edu (Colin Johnson)
}Subject: Re: right to have .plan
}Date: Mon, 09 Nov 92 18:50:45 EST
}
} My first reaction to this is that anyone who looks at you .plan
}file does so by choice.
Perhaps not. For example, should you "finger john@iastate.edu"
you will get more than you might expect...
pooh.cc> finger john@iastate.edu | wc -l
999
(there are a *lot* of John Somebodies here).
John
--
John Hascall ``An ill-chosen word is the fool's messenger.''
Systems Software Engineer
Project Vincent
Iowa State University Computation Center + Ames, IA 50011 + 515/294-9551
From caf-talk Caf Nov 11 09:09:33 1992
From: s_titz@ira.uka.de (Olaf Titz)
Newsgroups: comp.admin.policy,news.admin.policy,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
Subject: Re: What about child pornography?
Date: 11 Nov 1992 14:08:42 GMT
Message-ID: <1dr45aINNqq5@iraul1.ira.uka.de>
In article sb380@city.ac.uk (HOLT A D) writes:
>john@iastate.edu (John Hascall) writes:
>
>>betsys@cs.umb.edu (Elizabeth Schwartz) writes:
>>} ...
>>} We carry all the pictures groups, and we wish to continue to carry
>>}them, but what ABOUT child pornography? I really don't want us to be a
>>}passive distributor of this stuff. I am getting complaints from *fans*
>>}of the group that some postings are going too far.
>
>>How about this amazingly radical concept...
>
>> If something is illegal for your site, you delete it from your site.
>
>>John
>>--
>This attitude is _precisely_ why some sites ban a whole newsgroup, or set of
>newsgroups, even if only a few postings are illegal. They do not have the
>time or the wish to be a censor (selection of individual messages), but
>could face serious fines or even imprisonment.
>AIUI possession of child pornography is an absolute offence in UK law -
>unknowing possession is still an offence. (Perhaps an English lawyer
>could correct me if I am wrong)
O.K., it may be illegal in the UK to possess child porn (and it will
be in Germany too in the near future, and I do personally not support
any people who want that stuff), but how do people react on an
*international* network to these legal restrictions? There may be
religious countries that forbid possession of materials belonging to a
different than their own religion; or regimes that prohibit the
possession of politically incorrect (in their view) materials; are we
going to judge every single posting by the toughest standards
applicable anywhere?
The responsibility for a posting lies at ONE person: the one who
posted it.
Olaf
--
| Olaf Titz - comp.sc.student | o | uknf@dkauni2.bitnet | old address |
| univ. of karlsruhe - germany | _>\ _ | s_titz@ira.uka.de | is still |
| +49-721-60439 | (_)<(_) | praetorius@irc | valid |
"Stop talkin' and start chalkin'!" - Eight Ball Deluxe
From caf-talk Caf Nov 11 10:58:48 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,comp.org.eff.talk,comp.admin.policy,alt.censorship,soc.college
From: kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: Abstract of CAF-News 02.47
Message-ID: <1992Nov11.155837.6536@eff.org>
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 15:58:37 GMT
This is an abstract for the most recent "Computers and Academic
Freedom News" (CAF-News). Information about CAF-News follows the
abstract. The full CAF-News is available via anonymous ftp or by
email. For ftp access, do an anonymous ftp to ftp.eff.org
(192.88.144.4). Get file "pub/academic/news/cafv02n47".
The full CAF-News is also available via email. Send email to
archive-server@eff.org. Include the line:
send caf-news cafv02n47
--- begin abstract ---
[Week ending September 27, 1992
========================== KEY ================================
The words after the numbers are a short PARAPHRASES of the
articles, or QUOTES from them, NOT AN OBJECTIVE SUMMARY and
not necessarily my opinion.
===============================================================
Notes 1-5 continue discussion of the Iowa State dorm-door "censorship"
case.
1. "If a given forum becomes unmanageable, the owners of the forum
should have the right to close it. [...] Does the university have a
resposibility (contractual or otherwise) to provide a proper living
environment for its students? Does an oft-harassed minority have a
right, under the University's codes/policies, to demand a living
environment free from harassment?"
<1992Sep21.84022.5459@ms.uky.edu>
2. "You presume that the door displays violate valid antiharassment
rules. I confess that I presumed that they did not. [...] Because
maybe all, and certainly most, of the material on people's door is
legal, to suppress that material would be an injustice." (Author
also quotes from _UWM Post v. Regents_.)
<1992Sep21.134410.14591@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
3. "No, I'm assuming that the administration wishes to close an
unmanageable forum (which may, or may not, have been directly
established as such)." For instance, some (non-electronic) university
bulletin boards, "notably those in administrative areas, are
controlled by prior approval of materials to be posted. Is this
censorship? I think not.
<1992Sep21.91745.13775@ms.uky.edu>
4. "I've seen out-of-the-way signs proclaiming such free speech
ghettos at U. of Illinois and U. of Texas. I haven't, however, ever
heard of anyone being restricted to them. Nor does the current U. of
I. Student Code refer to ours. [...] The school should enforce
antiharassment rules; it should not close down whole forums."
<1992Sep21.221307.629@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
5. (From the original Iowa State poster:) "The Dept of Residence has
not said anything about the nature of the posts that prompted this
policy, save that they were 'racist' and 'denegrating'. Rumor has it
that the student committee has been formed. [...] It would not
surprise me at all if we hear nothing until a new policy is approved
by the Dept of Residence. It would have the veneer of student
approval and would therefore be stronger in a court of law."
Note 6 is an announcement regarding the legal counsel available
through the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
6. "REQUESTS FOR HELP IN SITUATIONS WHERE THERE'S NO CRIMINAL OR
CIVIL CASE This category includes situations in which, for example, a
college student has his computer-access privileges suspended because
a 'hacker newsletter' is discovered by a system administrator
rummaging through the student's directory. [...] If you are running
into a legal problem, or if you simply have a general legal question,
or even if you're having a problem on the Electronic Frontier and
you're not sure whether or not it's a legal problem, you should call
me, Mike Godwin, at 617-864-0665, or send me electronic mail at
mnemonic@eff.org or at 76711,317 on CompuServe. I won't always be
able to help, but I'm always willing to listen. And I may be able to
help more often than you'd think."
<1992Sep21.223239.26506@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Note 7 profiles First Amendment defender Nat Hentoff.
7. Notes from a recent lecture given by one of the great defenders of
the First Amendment, journalist Nat Hentoff, jazz critic, columnist
for _The Village Voice_ and author of the new book, _Free Speech for
Me--But Not for Thee_ (HarperCollins). Also bibliography and
annotations.
<1992Sep26.195343.28231@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Note 8 is a news item of possible university systems censorship.
8. "In keeping with the spirit of censorship, [Louisiana Tech
University] has turned off all the students e-mail functions for
Internet. [...] Not only has Tech turned off all the students
mailfeed, I have heard evidence that their are individuals reading
students mail/posts/[Netnews] subscriptions. I have also heard that some
students [Netnews] readings are used against them."
<1686D8F1E.ST32373@VM.CC.LATECH.EDU>
Note 9 reviews an article by academic computing expert Stephen
Franklin.
9. "While academic computing centers can be expected to provide a
smaller fraction of the total computing resources than in the past,
what they can be expected and challenged to provide can be of
increasing importance [...] in helping shape the academic community's
vision of what can be accomplished with these resources."
<199209232322.AA01056@orion.oac.uci.edu>
Note 10 is a reply to controversy over systems use at Ohio State.
10. (A private systems administrator:) "I make the decision, but then
I have the freedom of doing that - it's my system. College and
university managers don't have that freedom, since they have to
tolerate the goodie-two-shoes who are permitted to do their thinking
for them, and often must remove 'politicly sensitive' material from
their" systems.
<9209230011.AA11009@jupiter.cse.utoledo.edu>
Notes 11-12 respond to computing policy at University of Rochester.
11. (A Rice University sysadmin:) "There is no absolute right of
privacy. There is a limited right of privacy. This means that while
a person has an expectation of privacy regarding their data files or
information, there are conditions under which a duly authorized
person may access those files without obtaining the owner's consent
first. The task for you and your users is to define the conditions
of access such that you can balance the user's expectation of privacy
with the need to keep the system operating effectively."
12. (A Skidmore College sysadmin:) "Use your established review
groups. Most universities have a student conduct board and many have
some form of Professional conduct committee for faculty/staff. Use
them to help keep your practices in sync with the rest of the
institution."
<1992Sep23.001942.8273@scott.skidmore.edu>
- Aaron Barnhart]
--- end abstract ---
CAF-News is a weekly digest of notes from CAF-talk.
CAF-News is available as newsgroup alt.comp.acad-freedom.news or via
email. If you read newsgroups but your site doesn't get
alt.comp.acad-freedom.news, (politely) ask your sys admin to
subscribe. For info on email delivery, send email to
archive-server@eff.org. Include the line
send acad-freedom caf
Back issues of CAF-News are available via anonymous ftp or via email.
Ftp to ftp.eff.org. The directory is pub/academic/news. For
information about email access to the archive, send an email note to
archive-server@eff.org. Include the lines:
send acad-freedom README
help
index
Disclaimer: This CAF-News abstract was compiled by a guest editor or a
regular editor (Paul Joslin, Elizabeth M. Reid, Adam C. Gross, Mark C.
Sheehan, John F. Nixon or Carl M. Kadie). It is not an EFF
publication. The views an editor expresses and editorial decisions he
or she makes are his or her own.
--
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent EFF; this is just me.
=kadie@eff.org, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
From caf-talk Caf Nov 11 11:52:03 1992
Newsgroups: comp.admin.policy,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: dan@cubmol.bio.columbia.edu (Daniel Zabetakis)
Subject: Re: What about child pornography?
Message-ID: <1992Nov11.161741.2429@news.columbia.edu>
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 16:17:41 GMT
In article betsys@cs.umb.edu (Elizabeth Schwartz) writes:
>In my case, I feel literally in the middle because we DO feed some
>sites, and some of my users HAVE complained about child pornography in
>the alt.binaries.pictures.groups.
This goes right to the heart of the problem, as far as I am concerned.
I keep a fairly close eye on a.b.p.e, and I have seen nothing that I feel
certain is child pornography.
The only thing that may be illegal is the perennial Traci Lords stuff (low
resolution and fuzzy) that may be from her legal films anyway.
I think some of the confusion over this is a misunderstanding of what
legal and illegal mean in terms of pornogrphy. As I understand it, nothing
is illegal until it is ruled so by a court, and even then it only applies
locally. There is no test for pornographic content in terms of child porn,
and there is no test for obscenity in terms of other porn. I may be wrong,
but I haven't heard is reasonably argued otherwise.
By 'test', I mean a procedure where you can determine if what you produce
is legal or not. And I think that both child and obscene porn must be judged
to lack serious artistic, educational, or scientific value.
DanZ
--
This article is for entertainment purposes only. Any facts, opinions,
narratives or ideas contained herein are not necessarily true, and do
not necessarily represent the views of any particular person.
From caf-talk Caf Nov 12 02:20:33 1992
From: mcelwre@cnsvax.uwec.edu
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
Subject: SUPPRESSED Theory of Physics
Message-ID: <1992Nov11.201611.2274@cnsvax.uwec.edu>
Date: 12 Nov 92 02:16:11 GMT
The Theory of physics and astronomy partially summarized below should be
included in ALL physics, astronomy, and chemistry courses everywhere. It is
currently being ignored or SUPPRESSED.
LARSONIAN "Reciprocal System"
Orthodox physicists, astronomers, and astrophysicists
CLAIM to be looking for a "Unified Field Theory" in which all
of the forces of the universe can be explained with a single
set of laws or equations. But they have been systematically
IGNORING or SUPPRESSING an excellent one for 30 years!
The late Physicist Dewey B. Larson's comprehensive
GENERAL UNIFIED Theory of the physical universe, which he
calls the "Reciprocal System", is built on two fundamental
postulates about the physical and mathematical natures of
space and time:
(1) "The physical universe is composed ENTIRELY of ONE
component, MOTION, existing in THREE dimensions, in DISCRETE
UNITS, and in two RECIPROCAL forms, SPACE and TIME."
(2) "The physical universe conforms to the relations of
ORDINARY COMMUTATIVE mathematics, its magnitudes are
ABSOLUTE, and its geometry is EUCLIDEAN."
From these two postulates, Larson developed a COMPLETE
Theoretical Universe, using various combinations of
translational, vibrational, rotational, and vibrational-
rotational MOTIONS, the concepts of IN-ward and OUT-ward
SCALAR MOTIONS, and speeds in relation to the Speed of Light
(which Larson called "UNIT VELOCITY" and "THE NATURAL
DATUM").
At each step in the development, Larson was able to
MATCH objects in his Theoretical Universe with objects in the
REAL physical universe, (photons, sub-atomic particles
[INCOMPLETE ATOMS], charges, atoms, molecules, globular star
clusters, galaxies, binary star systems, solar systems, white
dwarf stars, pulsars, quasars, ETC.), even objects NOT YET
DISCOVERED THEN (such as EXPLODING GALAXIES, and GAMMA-RAY
BURSTS).
And applying his Theory to his NEW model of the atom,
Larson was able to precisely and accurately CALCULATE inter-
atomic distances in crystals and molecules.
All of this is described in good detail, with-OUT fancy
complex mathematics, in his books.
BOOKS of Dewey B. Larson
The following is a complete list of the late Physicist
Dewey B. Larson's books about his comprehensive GENERAL
UNIFIED Theory of the physical universe. Some of the early
books are out of print now, but still available through
inter-library loan.
"The Structure of the Physical Universe" (1959)
"The Case AGAINST the Nuclear Atom" (1963)
"Beyond Newton" (1964)
"New Light on Space and Time" (1965)
"Quasars and Pulsars" (1971)
"NOTHING BUT MOTION" (1979)
[A $9.50 SUBSTITUTE for the $8.3 BILLION "Super
Collider".]
[The last four chapters EXPLAIN chemical bonding.]
"The Neglected Facts of Science" (1982)
"THE UNIVERSE OF MOTION" (1984)
[FINAL SOLUTIONS to most ALL astrophysical
mysteries.]
"BASIC PROPERTIES OF MATTER" (1988)
[Available from:
The International Society of Unified Science
(ISUS)
1680 E. Atkin Ave.
Salt Lake City, Utah 84106 ]
Physicist Dewey B. Larson's Background
Physicist Dewey B. Larson was a retired Engineer
(Chemical or Electrical). He was about 91 years old when he
died a couple of years ago. He had a Bachelor of Science
Degree in Engineering Science from Oregon State University.
He developed his comprehensive GENERAL UNIFIED Theory of the
physical universe while trying to develop a way to COMPUTE
chemical properties based only on the elements used.
Larson's lack of a fancy "PH.D." degree might be one
reason that orthodox physicists are ignoring him, but it is
NOT A VALID REASON. Sometimes it takes a relative outsider
to CLEARLY SEE THE FOREST THROUGH THE TREES. At the same
time, it is clear from his books that he also knew ORTHODOX
physics and astronomy as well as ANY physicist or astronomer,
well enough to point out all their CONTRADICTIONS, AD HOC
ASSUMPTIONS, PRINCIPLES OF IMPOTENCE, IN-CONSISTENCIES, ETC..
Larson did NOT have the funds, etc. to experimentally
test his Theory. And it was NOT necessary for him to do so.
He simply compared the various parts of his Theory with OTHER
researchers' experimental and observational data. And in
many cases, HIS explanation FIT BETTER.
A SELF-CONSISTENT Theory is MUCH MORE than the ORTHODOX
physicists and astronomers have! They CLAIM to be looking
for a "unified field theory" that works, but have been
IGNORING one for over 30 years now!
"Modern physics" does NOT explain the physical universe
so well. Some parts of some of Larson's books are FULL of
quotations of leading orthodox physicists and astronomers who
agree. And remember that "epicycles", "crystal spheres",
"geocentricity", "flat earth theory", etc., ALSO once SEEMED
to explain it well, but were later proved CONCEPTUALLY WRONG.
Prof. Frank H. Meyer, Professor Emeritus of UW-Superior,
was/is a STRONG PROPONENT of Larson's Theory, and was (or
still is) President of Larson's organization, "THE
INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY OF UNIFIED SCIENCE", and Editor of
their quarterly Journal "RECIPROCITY". He moved to
Minneapolis after retiring.
"Super Collider" BOONDOGGLE!
I am AGAINST contruction of the "Superconducting Super
Collider", in Texas or anywhere else. It would be a GROSS
WASTE of money, and contribute almost NOTHING of "scientific"
value.
Most physicists don't realize it, but, according to the
comprehensive GENERAL UNIFIED Theory of the late Physicist
Dewey B. Larson, as described in his books, the strange GOOFY
particles ("mesons", "hyperons", ALLEGED "quarks", etc.)
which they are finding in EXISTING colliders (Fermi Lab,
Cern, etc.) are really just ATOMS of ANTI-MATTER, which are
CREATED by the high-energy colliding beams, and which quickly
disintegrate like cosmic rays because they are incompatible
with their environment.
A larger and more expensive collider will ONLY create a
few more elements of anti-matter that the physicists have not
seen there before, and the physicists will be EVEN MORE
CONFUSED THAN THEY ARE NOW!
Are a few more types of anti-matter atoms worth the $8.3
BILLION cost?!! Don't we have much more important uses for
this WASTED money?!
Another thing to consider is that the primary proposed
location in Texas has a serious and growing problem with some
kind of "fire ants" eating the insulation off underground
cables. How much POISONING of the ground and ground water
with insecticides will be required to keep the ants out of
the "Supercollider"?!
Naming the "Super Collider" after Ronald Reagon, as
proposed, is TOTALLY ABSURD! If it is built, it should be
named after a leading particle PHYSICIST.
LARSONIAN Anti-Matter
In Larson's comprehensive GENERAL UNIFIED Theory of the
physical universe, anti-matter is NOT a simple case of
opposite charges of the same types of particles. It has more
to do with the rates of vibrations and rotations of the
photons of which they are made, in relation to the
vibrational and rotational equivalents of the speed of light,
which Larson calls "Unit Velocity" and the "Natural Datum".
In Larson's Theory, a positron is actually a particle of
MATTER, NOT anti-matter. When a positron and electron meet,
the rotational vibrations (charges) and rotations of their
respective photons (of which they are made) neutralize each
other.
In Larson's Theory, the ANTI-MATTER half of the physical
universe has THREE dimensions of TIME, and ONLY ONE dimension
of space, and exists in a RECIPROCAL RELATIONSHIP to our
MATERIAL half.
LARSONIAN Relativity
The perihelion point in the orbit of the planet Mercury
has been observed and precisely measured to ADVANCE at the
rate of 574 seconds of arc per century. 531 seconds of this
advance are attributed via calculations to gravitational
perturbations from the other planets (Venus, Earth, Jupiter,
etc.). The remaining 43 seconds of arc are being used to
help "prove" Einstein's "General Theory of Relativity".
But the late Physicist Dewey B. Larson achieved results
CLOSER to the 43 seconds than "General Relativity" can, by
INSTEAD using "SPECIAL Relativity". In one or more of his
books, he applied the LORENTZ TRANSFORMATION on the HIGH
ORBITAL SPEED of Mercury.
Larson TOTALLY REJECTED "General Relativity" as another
MATHEMATICAL FANTASY. He also REJECTED most of "Special
Relativity", including the parts about "mass increases" near
the speed of light, and the use of the Lorentz Transform on
doppler shifts, (Those quasars with red-shifts greater than
1.000 REALLY ARE MOVING FASTER THAN THE SPEED OF LIGHT,
although most of that motion is away from us IN TIME.).
In Larson's comprehensive GENERAL UNIFIED Theory of the
physical universe, there are THREE dimensions of time instead
of only one. But two of those dimensions can NOT be measured
from our material half of the physical universe. The one
dimension that we CAN measure is the CLOCK time. At low
relative speeds, the values of the othe two dimensions are
NEGLIGIBLE; but at high speeds, they become significant, and
the Lorentz Transformation must be used as a FUDGE FACTOR.
[Larson often used the term "COORDINATE TIME" when writing
about this.]
In regard to "mass increases", it has been PROVEN in
atomic accelerators that acceleration drops toward zero near
the speed of light. But the formula for acceleration is
ACCELERATION = FORCE / MASS, (a = F/m). Orthodox physicists
are IGNORING the THIRD FACTOR: FORCE. In Larson's Theory,
mass STAYS CONSTANT and FORCE drops toward zero. FORCE is
actually a MOTION, or COMBINATIONS of MOTIONS, or RELATIONS
BETWEEN MOTIONS, including INward and OUTward SCALAR MOTIONS.
The expansion of the universe, for example, is an OUTward
SCALAR motion inherent in the universe and NOT a result of
the so-called "Big Bang" (which is yet another MATHEMATICAL
FANTASY).
THE UNIVERSE OF MOTION
I wish to recommend to EVERYONE the book "THE UNIVERSE
OF MOTION", by Dewey B. Larson, 1984, North Pacific
Publishers, (P.O. Box 13255, Portland, Oregon 97213), 456
pages, indexed, hardcover.
It contains the Astrophysical portions of a GENERAL
UNIFIED Theory of the physical universe developed by that
author, an UNrecognized GENIUS, more than thirty years ago.
It contains FINAL SOLUTIONS to most all Astrophysical
mysteries, including the FORMATION of galaxies, binary and
multiple star systems, and solar systems, the TRUE ORIGIN of
the "3-degree" background radiation, cosmic rays, and gamma-
ray bursts, and the TRUE NATURE of quasars, pulsars, white
dwarfs, exploding galaxies, etc..
It contains what astronomers and astrophysicists are ALL
looking for, if they are ready to seriously consider it with
OPEN MINDS!
The following is an example of his Theory's success:
In his first book in 1959, "THE STRUCTURE OF THE PHYSICAL
UNIVERSE", Larson predicted the existence of EXPLODING
GALAXIES, several years BEFORE astronomers started finding
them. They are a NECESSARY CONSEQUENCE of Larson's
comprehensive Theory. And when QUASARS were discovered, he
had an immediate related explanation for them also.
GAMMA-RAY BURSTS
Astro-physicists and astronomers are still scratching
their heads about the mysterious GAMMA-RAY BURSTS. They were
originally thought to originate from "neutron stars" in the
disc of our galaxy. But the new Gamma Ray Telescope now in
Earth orbit has been detecting them in all directions
uniformly, and their source locations in space do NOT
correspond to any known objects, (except for a few cases of
directional coincidence).
Gamma-ray bursts are a NECESSARY CONSEQUENCE of the
GENERAL UNIFIED Theory of the physical universe developed by
the late Physicist Dewey B. Larson. According to page 386 of
his book "THE UNIVERSE OF MOTION", published in 1984, the
gamma-ray bursts are coming from SUPERNOVA EXPLOSIONS in the
ANTI-MATTER HALF of the physical universe, which Larson calls
the "Cosmic Sector". Because of the relationship between the
anti-matter and material halves of the physical universe, and
the way they are connected together, the gamma-ray bursts can
pop into our material half anywhere in space, seemingly at
random. (This is WHY the source locations of the bursts do
not correspond with known objects, and come from all
directions uniformly.)
I wonder how close to us in space a source location
would have to be for a gamma-ray burst to kill all or most
life on Earth! There would be NO WAY to predict one, NOR to
stop it!
Perhaps some of the MASS EXTINCTIONS of the past, which
are now being blamed on impacts of comets and asteroids, were
actually caused by nearby GAMMA-RAY BURSTS!
LARSONIAN Binary Star Formation
About half of all the stars in the galaxy in the
vicinity of the sun are binary or double. But orthodox
astronomers and astrophysicists still have no satisfactory
theory about how they form or why there are so many of them.
But binary star systems are actually a LIKELY
CONSEQUENCE of the comprehensive GENERAL UNIFIED Theory of
the physical universe developed by the late Physicist Dewey
B. Larson.
I will try to summarize Larsons explanation, which is
detailed in Chapter 7 of his book "THE UNIVERSE OF MOTION"
and in some of his other books.
First of all, according to Larson, stars do NOT generate
energy by "fusion". A small fraction comes from slow
gravitational collapse. The rest results from the COMPLETE
ANNIHILATION of HEAVY elements (heavier than IRON). Each
element has a DESTRUCTIVE TEMPERATURE LIMIT. The heavier the
element is, the lower is this limit. A star's internal
temperature increases as it grows in mass via accretion and
absorption of the decay products of cosmic rays, gradually
reaching the destructive temperature limit of lighter and
lighter elements.
When the internal temperature of the star reaches the
destructive temperature limit of IRON, there is a Type I
SUPERNOVA EXPLOSION! This is because there is SO MUCH iron
present; and that is related to the structure of iron atoms
and the atom building process, which Larson explains in some
of his books [better than I can].
When the star explodes, the lighter material on the
outer portion of the star is blown outward in space at less
than the speed of light. The heavier material in the center
portion of the star was already bouncing around at close to
the speed of light, because of the high temperature. The
explosion pushes that material OVER the speed of light, and
it expands OUTWARD IN TIME, which is equivalent to INWARD IN
SPACE, and it often actually DISAPPEARS for a while.
Over long periods of time, both masses start to fall
back gravitationally. The material that had been blown
outward in space now starts to form a RED GIANT star. The
material that had been blown OUTWARD IN TIME starts to form a
WHITE DWARF star. BOTH stars then start moving back toward
the "MAIN SEQUENCE" from opposite directions on the H-R
Diagram.
The chances of the two masses falling back into the
exact same location in space, making a single lone star
again, are near zero. They will instead form a BINARY system,
orbiting each other.
According to Larson, a white dwarf star has an INVERSE
DENSITY GRADIENT (is densest at its SURFACE), because the
material at its center is most widely dispersed (blown
outward) in time. This ELIMINATES the need to resort to
MATHEMATICAL FANTASIES about "degenerate matter", "neutron
stars", "black holes", etc..
LARSONIAN Solar System Formation
If the mass of the heavy material at the center of the
exploding star is relatively SMALL, then, instead of a single
white dwarf star, there will be SEVERAL "mini" white dwarf
stars (revolving around the red giant star, but probably
still too far away in three-dimensional TIME to be affected
by its heat, etc.). These will become PLANETS!
In Chapter 7 of THE UNIVERSE OF MOTION, Larson used all
this information, and other principles of his comprehensive
GENERAL UNIFIED Theory of the physical universe, to derive
his own version of Bode's Law.
"Black Hole" FANTASY!
I heard that physicist Stephen W. Hawking recently
completed a theoretical mathematical analysis of TWO "black
holes" merging together into a SINGLE "black hole", and
concluded that the new "black hole" would have MORE MASS than
the sum of the two original "black holes".
Such a result should be recognized by EVERYone as a RED
FLAG, causing widespread DOUBT about the whole IDEA of "black
holes", etc.!
After reading Physicist Dewey B. Larson's books about
his comprehensive GENERAL UNIFIED Theory of the physical
universe, especially his book "THE UNIVERSE OF MOTION", it is
clear to me that "black holes" are NOTHING more than
MATHEMATICAL FANTASIES! The strange object at Cygnus X-1 is
just an unusually massive WHITE DWARF STAR, NOT the "black
hole" that orthodox astronomers and physicists so badly want
to "prove" their theory.
By the way, I do NOT understand why so much publicity is
being given to physicist Stephen Hawking. The physicists and
astronomers seem to be acting as if Hawking's severe physical
problem somehow makes him "wiser". It does NOT!
I wish the same attention had been given to Physicist
Dewey B. Larson while he was still alive. Widespread
publicity and attention should NOW be given to Larson's
Theory, books, and organization (The International Society of
Unified Science).
ELECTRO-MAGNETIC PROPULSION
I heard of that concept many years ago, in connection
with UFO's and unorthodox inventors, but I never was able to
find out how or why they work, or how they are constructed.
I found a possible clue about why they might work on
pages 112-113 of the book "BASIC PROPERTIES OF MATTER", by
the late Physicist Dewey B. Larson, which describes part of
Larson's comprehensive GENERAL UNIFIED Theory of the physical
universe. I quote one paragraph:
"As indicated in the preceding chapter, the development
of the theory of the universe of motion arrives at a totally
different concept of the nature of electrical resistance.
The electrons, we find, are derived from the environment. It
was brought out in Volume I [Larson's book "NOTHING BUT
MOTION"] that there are physical processes in operation which
produce electrons in substantial quantities, and that,
although the motions that constitute these electrons are, in
many cases, absorbed by atomic structures, the opportunities
for utilizing this type of motion in such structures are
limited. It follows that there is always a large excess of
free electrons in the material sector [material half] of the
universe, most of which are uncharged. In this uncharged
state the electrons cannot move with respect to extension
space, because they are inherently rotating units of space,
and the relation of space to space is not motion. In open
space, therefore, each uncharged electron remains permanently
in the same location with respect to the natural reference
system, in the manner of a photon. In the context of the
stationary spatial reference system the uncharged electron,
like the photon, is carried outward at the speed of light by
the progression of the natural reference system. All
material aggregates are thus exposed to a flux of electrons
similar to the continual bombardment by photons of radiation.
Meanwhile there are other processes, to be discussed later,
whereby electrons are returned to the environment. The
electron population of a material aggregate such as the earth
therefore stabilizes at an equilibrium level."
Note that in Larson's Theory, UNcharged electrons are
also massLESS, and are basically photons of light of a
particular frequency (above the "unit" frequency) spinning
around one axis at a particular rate (below the "unit" rate).
("Unit velocity" is the speed of light, and there are
vibrational and rotational equivalents to the speed of light,
according to Larson's Theory.) [I might have the "above" and
"below" labels mixed up.]
Larson is saying that outer space is filled with mass-
LESS UN-charged electrons flying around at the speed of
light!
If this is true, then the ELECTRO-MAGNETIC PROPULSION
fields of spacecraft might be able to interact with these
electrons, or other particles in space, perhaps GIVING them a
charge (and mass) and shooting them toward the rear to
achieve propulsion. (In Larson's Theory, an electrical charge
is a rotational vibration of a particular frequency (above
the "unit" frequency) superimposed on the rotation of the
particle.)
The paragraph quoted above might also give a clue to
confused meteorologists about how lightning is generated in
clouds.
SUPPRESSION of LARSONIAN Physics
The comprehensive GENERAL UNIFIED Theory of the physical
universe developed by the late Physicist Dewey B. Larson has
been available for more than 30 YEARS, published in 1959 in
his first book "THE STRUCTURE OF THE PHYSICAL UNIVERSE".
It is TOTALLY UN-SCIENTIFIC for Hawking, Wheeler, Sagan,
and the other SACRED PRIESTS of the RELIGION they call
"science" (or "physics", or "astronomy", etc.), as well as
the "scientific" literature and the "education" systems, to
TOTALLY IGNORE Larson's Theory has they have.
Larson's Theory has excellent explanations for many
things now puzzling orthodox physicists and astronomers, such
as gamma-ray bursts and the nature of quasars.
Larson's Theory deserves to be HONESTLY and OPENLY
discussed in the physics, chemistry, and astronomy journals,
in the U.S. and elsewhere. And at least the basic principles
of Larson's Theory should be included in all related courses
at UW-EC, UW-Madison, Cambridge, Cornell University, and
elsewhere, so that students are not kept in the dark about a
worthy alternative to the DOGMA they are being fed.
UN-altered REPRODUCTION and DISSEMINATION of this
partial summary is ENCOURAGED.
Robert E. McElwaine
B.S., Physics and Astronomy, UW-EC
From caf-talk Caf Nov 12 03:58:53 1992
From: s_titz@ira.uka.de (Olaf Titz)
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
Subject: Definition & implication of censorship (was Re: Hitler's 'Mein Kampf')
Date: 12 Nov 1992 08:52:45 GMT
Message-ID: <1dt60tINNach@iraul1.ira.uka.de>
In article <3068@bsu-cs.bsu.edu> joemays@bsu-cs.bsu.edu (Joseph F. Mays) writes:
>In article s0454850@let.rug.nl (J.P. Prenger) writes:
>> 'Where does censorship start
>
>With someone, anyone, thinking that an idea is so dangerous or offensive
>that it is necessary to ask the government to step in and prevent that
>idea from being expressed.
It needs not necessarily a government being involved, change that for
'authority' (of whatever, maybe dubious kind...)
Examples include teachers (censoring student newsletters in high
schools - this is in fact *required by law* in some places in Germany,
which has a Constitution Article against censorship) or Computer
Center managers (sometimes even operators)...
>
>> & where does it stop?'
>
>With government control of ideas, thought, and expression.
With *control* of ideas, thought and expression, not limited to such
action being taken by a Government.
>
>>An example: as far as I know, the only book in Holland which is forbidden
>>by the law is Adolf Hitler's 'Mein Kampf'. There are people here, who think that
>>you shouldn't do that. On the contrary, this book should be used
>>in schools, to show how easy something can start & how terrible it can
>>end (did it ever end? --> several anti-semitic & racial fights in Germany,
>>Italy, a bomb in a mosk in Holland, etc.)
>
>Actually, "Mein Kampf" was in our high school library (the high school
>I went to was kind of strange...). I read it. It taught me why fascism
>is wrong. It also taught me that Mr. Schicklegruber was no better a
>writer than he was a painter.
And his artistic and literary work may well have been forgotten and
much mess had been saved if he had not done the very worst and come up
with *politics*... ('And then I decided to become a politician.')
In Germany we had recently some irritation about a professor of
Philosophy who quoted lengthy excerpts from 'Mein Kampf' in his
lectures. He can not be stopped from doing so, but doubts remain about
his claimed honest intentions to show his students how bad thoughts
that are.
My opinion on that issue is that even in this case, the banning of
books is *not* beneficial.
Olaf
--
| Olaf Titz - comp.sc.student | o | uknf@dkauni2.bitnet | old address |
| univ. of karlsruhe - germany | _>\ _ | s_titz@ira.uka.de | is still |
| +49-721-60439 | (_)<(_) | praetorius@irc | valid |
"Stop talkin' and start chalkin'!" - Eight Ball Deluxe
From caf-talk Caf Nov 12 05:15:09 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: jbcondat@attmail.com
Subject: Please rush you opinion...
Message-ID: <199211121014.AA14077@eff.org>
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 10:14:57 GMT
Dear Sir:
Could you please help me and give me your opinion related to the following
article that you can find in reprint form?
I offer a free copy of _C'est decide! J'ecris mon virus_ for all the 20 first
opnions send to my e-mail address: jbcondat@attmail.com (don't forget to
give you *physical addresse*).
Regards,
jbc
--
Jean-Bernard CONDAT (General Secretary)------Chaos Computer Club France [CCCF]
B.P. 8005, 69351 Lyon Cedex 08// France //43 rue des Rosiers, 93400 Saint-Ouen
Phone: +33 1 40101775, Fax.: +33 1 40101764, Hacker's BBS (8x): +33 1 40102223
==============================================================================
From "Intelligence Newsletter", No. 202 (Oct. 8, 1992), Page 5, by O. Schimdt
MAKING THE NEWS AND BOOKSTANDS
The computer virus "threat" is back in the news with a new study by IBM
specialist Jeffrey O. Kephart and on the bookstands with a French do-it-
yourself build-your-own manual on viruses. According to Kephart of IBM's
High Integrity Computing Laboratory, most previous theories on the "social
structure of computer use and networks were faulty": not every machine
could make contact with every other machine in one, two or three "steps".
Most individual computers are not connected to others systems but only
to their nearest neighbors. Therefore, most infections take place not through
networks, but through the physical exchange of disks. Moreover, many of the
1,500 known viruses are not good replicators and many are not destructive.
Even the remaining good replicators are "almost all defeated by normal
anti-virus programs." To advance knowledge such as this concerning viruses,
*Chaos Computer Club France* (CCCF) has decided to publish the French trans-
lation of "The Black Book of Computer Virus" by Mark Ludwig "which was
censored in the U.S." (French title, "C'est decide! J'ecris mon virus,"
Editions Eyrolles). [...] The book contains "computer codes for writing your
own virus," but according to CCCF any such virus can be defeated by normal
anti-virus programs. Moreover, there is no French law forbidding the publi-
cation of virus computer codes. The book is intended for "responsible adults"
and bears the warning "Forbidden for readers not 18 years old".
==============================================================================
From caf-talk Caf Nov 12 05:19:19 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: jbcondat@attmail.com
Subject: Please rush you opinion...
Message-ID: <199211121019.AA14178@eff.org>
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 10:19:10 GMT
Dear Sir:
Could you please help me and give me your opinion related to the following
article that you can find in reprint form?
I offer a free copy of _C'est decide! J'ecris mon virus_ for all the 20 first
opnions send to my e-mail address: jbcondat@attmail.com (don't forget to
give you *physical addresse*).
Regards,
jbc
--
Jean-Bernard CONDAT (General Secretary)------Chaos Computer Club France [CCCF]
B.P. 8005, 69351 Lyon Cedex 08// France //43 rue des Rosiers, 93400 Saint-Ouen
Phone: +33 1 40101775, Fax.: +33 1 40101764, Hacker's BBS (8x): +33 1 40102223
==============================================================================
From "Intelligence Newsletter", No. 202 (Oct. 8, 1992), Page 5, by O. Schimdt
MAKING THE NEWS AND BOOKSTANDS
The computer virus "threat" is back in the news with a new study by IBM
specialist Jeffrey O. Kephart and on the bookstands with a French do-it-
yourself build-your-own manual on viruses. According to Kephart of IBM's
High Integrity Computing Laboratory, most previous theories on the "social
structure of computer use and networks were faulty": not every machine
could make contact with every other machine in one, two or three "steps".
Most individual computers are not connected to others systems but only
to their nearest neighbors. Therefore, most infections take place not through
networks, but through the physical exchange of disks. Moreover, many of the
1,500 known viruses are not good replicators and many are not destructive.
Even the remaining good replicators are "almost all defeated by normal
anti-virus programs." To advance knowledge such as this concerning viruses,
*Chaos Computer Club France* (CCCF) has decided to publish the French trans-
lation of "The Black Book of Computer Virus" by Mark Ludwig "which was
censored in the U.S." (French title, "C'est decide! J'ecris mon virus,"
Editions Eyrolles). [...] The book contains "computer codes for writing your
own virus," but according to CCCF any such virus can be defeated by normal
anti-virus programs. Moreover, there is no French law forbidding the publi-
cation of virus computer codes. The book is intended for "responsible adults"
and bears the warning "Forbidden for readers not 18 years old".
==============================================================================
From caf-talk Caf Nov 12 06:17:35 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,news.sysadmin,news.admin,news.admin.policy,alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.d
From: barnhart@ddsw1.mcs.com (Mr. Aaron Barnhart)
Subject: Re: [news.sysadmin, et al.] Re: a.b.p.e. distribution (was, Re: Does USENET condone CHILD PORNOGRAPHY?)
Message-ID:
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 03:53:47 GMT
:[A repost - Carl]
:
:I must be bored, following up my own posts, but apparently I was
:mistaken. The reason actually given by the higher-ups at the UW
:for removing a.b.p.e. was:
:
:The picture groups take up waaaayyy too much disk space; we can't
:afford them. We will, therefore, kill the entire a.b.p. hierarchy.
:
:And they did.
:
:Now, I suspect that reasons 1 and 2 as given in my previous post
:are what really drove this decision, but maybe not. Hard to believe
:that they couldn't just have put a pretty quick expire time on the
:a.b.p. groups and let it go, but I guess they didn't want to.
:
:Apologies if I misled anyone through my ignorance.
:
:Josh
Well now, I'm not sure ignorance is yours to keep, Josh. How long's
it been since most of our readers here have checked the bandwidth
specs on the a.b.p. groups?
In a word, it's unbefuckinleevable. Saul had his thousands, but
Long Dong Silver had his tens of thousands. Lookit these three
month old figures from UUNET:
No. of $ Cost % of Cumulative
Rank Kbytes Articles per Site Total % of Total Group (Articles/contributor)
1 35253.4 817 93.03 7.7% 7.7% alt.binaries.pictures.erotica (4.8)
2 16878.4 412 44.54 3.7% 11.4% alt.binaries.pictures.misc (3.8)
3 6049.4 2855 15.96 1.3% 12.7% talk.politics.misc (4.3)
4 6044.8 167 15.95 1.3% 14.0% alt.binaries.pictures.tasteless (4.5)
Some periods I have seen a.b.p.e. as high as 57 megabytes. 8 percent
of Usenet sloshing along one little waterway!
Quite apart from the 1st Amendment/academic computing policy issues,
I think people should be aware of the overgrown size of these groups,
because then claims like UW's, while not airtight, are certainly
defensible and definitely understandable.
And ignorance doesn't stop there. For instance, I have no idea whether
that "Cost per Site" is in the grand tradition of mainframe funny money,
or whether it at least hints at the actual cost these megabinarygroups
are bringing upon sites. And what about the redundancy of newsfeeds?
When UUNET reports 35 megs of bandwidth in two weeks for a group, is\
that just a fraction of the total gross received for that group by
each site?
The Usenet FAQs are very good at answering a lot of questions, but
certain technical questions aren't addressed -- just the ones that
might shed a little new light on this heated subject.
Aaron
From caf-talk Caf Nov 12 10:37:09 1992
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
Subject: [comp.org.eff.talk] Query: Can Universities limit network access &/or 'spy` on users?
Message-ID:
Date: 12 Nov 92 14:54:22 GMT
[A repost - Carl]
From caf-talk Caf Nov 12 10:37:09 1992
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Query: Can Universities limit network access &/or 'spy` on users?
Message-ID: <1992Nov2.041052.28698@cybernet.cse.fau.edu>
Date: 2 Nov 92 04:10:52 GMT
I'm sorry if the subject of this posting seems confusing. I couldn't think
of anything better.
I am writting this in hopes of finding out the legality of some thing my
university is doing. This came about recently when some talks were begun
on how to improve access to networks.
Basically the situation is this: We have a department on campus called
"Academic Computer Center" which is in charge of the universities Vax. This
Vax is the gateway on campus to BitNet and the Internet. However, student
accounts on the machine cannot access networks. Ie, 'ftp', 'telnet', 'rlogin',
'rsh', and Internet email are denied to these accounts. If you get a `sponseredaccount' (ie you are doing work needing this stuff) you can access it. In
my department (Comp Sci & Eng) we use Unix workstations and do not restrict
access to networking. Also the student chapter of the ACM has been running
a BBS that gives access to some networking stuff and Usenet access. This was
done because ACC was not providing it.
The reason I had heard for ACC not giving networking access was that it would
put too much strain on the Vax, despite the fact that all the other departments
with machines (like mine) are using the vax for the network gateway.
We recently had some interviews to improve network access and all the students
interviewed (5 out of 14000, I was one) urged that all students be given Vax
accounts with full network access, just like at other schools. We then started
discussing this on our local usenet group. A member of ACC stated there that
the reason students are denied network access is because they use it for
'frivolous' activies as opposed to 'research' uses. Apparently they feared
the state would take network access away because some students supposedly are
abusing it.
What infuriates me is HOW WOULD THEY KNOW HOW PEOPLE ARE USING THIS STUFF?
The only why I see that they would know is if they are spying on student
activties, ie reading their mail to see if its serious or not, etc. Frankly
this is totally unethical, but is it illegal? I would think users would have
some right to privacy in their accounts from the sysadms spying on them.
What I would like to know is if this is indeed illegal. Frankly if it's not
it should be.
Thanks for you time.
--
<< >>
<< Michael R. Brown CS Graduate Student-Florida Atlantic Univ >>
<< Internet: michaelb@sol.cse.fau.edu >>
<< BitNet: m_brown@fauvax >>
--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
From caf-talk Caf Nov 12 10:37:11 1992
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
Subject: [comp.org.eff.talk] Re: Query: Can Universities limit network access &/or 'spy` on users?
Message-ID:
Date: 12 Nov 92 14:54:35 GMT
[A repost - Carl]
From caf-talk Caf Nov 12 10:37:11 1992
From: gtoal@ibmpcug.co.uk (Graham Toal)
Subject: Re: Query: Can Universities limit network access &/or 'spy` on users?
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 16:09:48 GMT
Message-ID:
In article <1992Nov2.041052.28698@cybernet.cse.fau.edu> michaelb@cse.fau.edu (Michael Rogero Brown) writes:
>What infuriates me is HOW WOULD THEY KNOW HOW PEOPLE ARE USING THIS STUFF?
>The only why I see that they would know is if they are spying on student
>activties, ie reading their mail to see if its serious or not, etc. Frankly
>this is totally unethical, but is it illegal? I would think users would have
>some right to privacy in their accounts from the sysadms spying on them.
Nope, you have no rights whatsoever. Public telnet gateways throughout
the world are logged and everyone who uses them should be aware of this.
The ostensible reason for this monitoring to to catch people hacking other
systems, but I see no way of stopping unprincipled sysnazis from using the
information for their own gain.
G
(If anyone knows of any *laws* that stop sysnazis monitoring
accounts and telnet sessions, especially in Britain, please post)
--
--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
From caf-talk Caf Nov 12 10:37:12 1992
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
Subject: [comp.org.eff.talk] Re: Query: Can Universities limit network access &/or 'spy` on users
Message-ID:
Date: 12 Nov 92 14:54:48 GMT
[A repost - Carl]
From caf-talk Caf Nov 12 10:37:12 1992
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: Query: Can Universities limit network access &/or 'spy` on users
Message-ID: <4so4TB5w164w@cellar.org>
Date: 12 Nov 92 00:35:02 GMT
michaelb@cse.fau.edu (Michael Rogero Brown) writes:
> Basically the situation is this: We have a department on campus called
> "Academic Computer Center" which is in charge of the universities Vax. This
> Vax is the gateway on campus to BitNet and the Internet. However, student
> accounts on the machine cannot access networks. Ie, 'ftp', 'telnet', 'rlogin
> 'rsh', and Internet email are denied to these accounts. If you get a `sponse
> my department (Comp Sci & Eng) we use Unix workstations and do not restrict
> access to networking. Also the student chapter of the ACM has been running
> a BBS that gives access to some networking stuff and Usenet access. This was
> done because ACC was not providing it.
No doubt about it, that's tacky. ESPECIALLY the e-mail piece of it. In my
mind, it's like saying, "well, we have a library here with a lot of books in
it. But you can't check 'em out unless it's for a class. So, guess what,
if you want to read a book about past presidential campaigns and you're not
enrolled in a course in political science, you can't check the book out."
Is it legal? yes. Enforcable? yes. But it's also not the kind of thing
that promotes a lot of learning. Just my $.02.
> The reason I had heard for ACC not giving networking access was that it
> would put too much strain on the Vax, despite the fact that all the other
> departmen with machines (like mine) are using the vax for the network
> gateway.
No doubt there would be a lot of strain on the VAX if everything was
actually done on it. This part of the argument I can buy; there is a
difference between using the machine as a network gateway and actually doing
the work on it.
> What infuriates me is HOW WOULD THEY KNOW HOW PEOPLE ARE USING THIS STUFF?
> The only why I see that they would know is if they are spying on student
> activties, ie reading their mail to see if its serious or not, etc. Frankly
> this is totally unethical, but is it illegal? I would think users would have
> some right to privacy in their accounts from the sysadms spying on them.
Well, that depends. I'm no lawyer, but here's my understanding. They are
not allowed to eavesdrop if you have a "reasonable expectation of privacy".
(What's reasonable? I dunno. Go ask a lawyer.) If, however, they REMOVE
your reasonable expectation, by saying, "We may monitor you if we feel like
it", then they have that right because they own the system. In a nutshell,
it depends on what policies are established at your institution.
Also, it is at least possible that they do not want to have to make
decisions about policing use of net access. So they have punted by deciding
to make sure the issue doesn't come up.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kyle Barger "Beauty, alas, is not relevant to Usenet."
kbarger@cellar.org --Brendan Kehoe, _Zen and the Art of the Internet_
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
From caf-talk Caf Nov 12 11:55:38 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,comp.org.eff.talk
From: sears@tree.egr.uh.edu (Paul S. Sears)
Subject: Re: [comp.org.eff.talk] Re: Query: Can Universities limit network access &/or 'spy` on users?
Message-ID: <1992Nov12.161654.25896@menudo.uh.edu>
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 16:16:54 GMT
In article kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
=>[A repost - Carl]
=>
=>Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
=>From: gtoal@ibmpcug.co.uk (Graham Toal)
=>Subject: Re: Query: Can Universities limit network access &/or 'spy` on
users?
=>Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 16:09:48 GMT
=>Message-ID:
=>
=>In article <1992Nov2.041052.28698@cybernet.cse.fau.edu> michaelb@cse.fau.edu
(Michael Rogero Brown) writes:
=>>What infuriates me is HOW WOULD THEY KNOW HOW PEOPLE ARE USING THIS STUFF?
=>>The only why I see that they would know is if they are spying on student
=>>activties, ie reading their mail to see if its serious or not, etc.
Frankly
=>>this is totally unethical, but is it illegal? I would think users would
have
=>>some right to privacy in their accounts from the sysadms spying on them.
=>
Michael Rogero Brown:
Do you know they are "spying" by explicitly watching what you are doing?
They can tell how the system resources are being used by simple logs that are
standard to any system (VMS has exceptional account utilities). It is highly
likely that they _never_ looked at the content, but are making empirical
assumptions based on usage of system resources. Before you condem the
administrators, try to find out exactly what they are doing...
=>Nope, you have no rights whatsoever. Public telnet gateways throughout
=>the world are logged and everyone who uses them should be aware of this.
=>
=>The ostensible reason for this monitoring to to catch people hacking other
=>systems, but I see no way of stopping unprincipled sysnazis from using the
=>information for their own gain.
=>
Carl M. Kadie:
No.. not entirely correct. Yes, much is logged, but _usually_ one relevant
information, such as headers, connect times, etc (however I am not saying that
there are not unethical sys admins, I am saying that most are ethical and most
don't have the time nor inclination to watch the content of every message or
session that occurs on their system/gateway). For example, most of
connections made to one of my servers is logged (in fact, every connection
made, i.e, finger, telnet, rlogin, sendmail, sockets) is logged to a file.
Only statistical information is logged -- _not_ content. Please be aware of
this distinction:
Nov 12 06:41:52 server fingerd[3607]: connect from lucca@ghost.dsi.unimi.it
Nov 12 07:15:20 server fingerd[3639]: connect from kolsaas.ifi.uio.no
Nov 12 08:26:43 server ftpd[3684]: connect from Izmir.EE.UH.EDU
Nov 12 08:27:03 server ftpd[3685]: connect from Izmir.EE.UH.EDU
Nov 12 08:54:20 server rlogind[3733]: connect from thanatos
Nov 12 09:21:35 server ftpd[3824]: connect from Izmir.EE.UH.EDU
Nov 12 09:30:09 server ftpd[3831]: connect from Izmir.EE.UH.EDU
Nov 12 09:36:07 server rlogind[3860]: connect from tree
Nov 12 09:42:22 server ftpd[3882]: connect from Izmir.EE.UH.EDU
Nov 12 09:47:27 server login: 1 LOGIN FAILURE FROM Jane.UH.EDU, user xxxxx
Logins are logged, login failures are logged, fingers are logged and so on...
I can scan this log looking for anything that is unusual like many repeated
login attempts/failures from a particular host. This is extremely helpful in
tracking down system problems and hacking attempts. This is all the
information I need. I don't need to know the content of a session, nor do I
want to know...
=>G
=>(If anyone knows of any *laws* that stop sysnazis monitoring
=>accounts and telnet sessions, especially in Britain, please post)
Is this speculation or do you have evidence that "sysnazis" are monitoring
accounts. And what is considered monitoring? Keeping track of when a user
logs in and out? Keep track of disk usage? Or are they reading _every_ piece
of email sent to/from a user? Your claim about monitoring is vague, please be
more clear. I am tired of the sys admins always being the bad guys because
everyone is spouting "right to privacy." This might be hard to accept, but
privacy and monitoring can coexist, as long as the monitoring has a legitimate
purpose that is stated in a policy that the user has been made aware of and
has agreed to. We monitor disk quotas. You can argue that is an invasion of
privacy, and technically you are correct. However, we are not monitoring the
content of your files, just how much space they are taking up. This is a
necessary part of managing the system. Enough said....
=>Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign
--
Paul S. Sears * sears@uh.edu (NeXT Mail OK)
The University of Houston * suggestions@tree.egr.uh.edu (NeXT
Engineering Computing Center * comments, complaints, questions)
NeXT System Administration * DoD#1967 '83 NightHawk 650SC
>>> SSI Diving Certification #755020059 <<<
"Programming is like sex: One mistake and you support it a lifetime."
From caf-talk Caf Nov 12 17:27:12 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: ACM Code of Ethics .... Guidelines
Message-ID: <199211122226.AA24672@eff.org>
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 12:26:56 GMT
ACM CODE OF ETHICS AND PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT GUIDELINES
1. GENERAL MORAL IMPERATIVES. As an ACM member I will...
1.1 Contribute to society and human well-being.
This principle concerning the quality of life of all people affirms an
obligation to protect fundamental human rights and to respect the
diversity of all cultures. An essential aim of computing professionals
is to minimize negative consequences of computing systems, including
threats to health and safety. When designing or implementing systems,
computing professionals must attempt to ensure that the products of
their efforts will be used in socially responsible ways, will meet
social needs, and will avoid harmful effects to health and welfare.
In addition to a safe social environment, human well-being
includes a safe natural environment. Therefore, computing profession
als who design and develop systems must be alert to, and make others
aware of, any potential damage to the local or global environment.
1.2 Avoid harm to others.
"Harm" means injury or negative consequences, such as undesirable loss
of information, loss of property, property damage, or unwanted envi
ronmental impacts. This principle prohibits use of computing technology
in ways that result in harm to any of the following: users, general
public, employees, employers. Harmful actions include intentional
destruction or modification of files and programs leading to serious
loss of resources or unnecessary expenditure of human resources such as
the time and effort required to purge systems of "computer viruses."
Well-intended actions, including those that accomplish assigned
duties, may lead to harm unexpectedly. In such an event the respon
sible person or persons are obliged to undo or mitigate the negative
consequences as much as possible. One way to avoid unintentional harm
is to carefully consider potential impacts on all those affected by
decisions made during design and implementation.
To minimize the possibility of indirectly harming others, comput
ing professionals must minimize malfunctions by following generally
accepted standards for system design and testing. Furthermore, it is
often necessary to assess the social consequences of systems to project
the likelihood of any serious harm to others. If system features are
misrepresented to users, coworkers, or supervisors, the individual
computing professional is responsible for any resulting injury.
In the work environment the computing professional has the addi
tional obligation to report any signs of system dangers that might
result in serious personal or social damage. If one's superiors do not
act to curtail or mitigate such dangers, it may be necessary to "blow
the whistle" to help correct the problem or reduce the risk. However,
capricious or misguided reporting of violations can, itself, be harm
ful. Before reporting violations, all relevant aspects of the incident
must be thoroughly assessed. In particular, the assessment or risk and
responsibility must be credible. It is suggested that advice be sought
from other computing professionals. See principle 2.5 regarding thor
ough evaluations.
1.3 Be honest and trustworthy.
Honesty is an essential component of trust. Without trust an organi
zation cannot function effectively. The honest computing professional
will not make deliberately false or deceptive claims about a system or
system design, but will instead provide full disclosure of all perti
nent system limitations and problems.
A computer professional has a duty to be honest about his or her
own qualifications, and about any circumstances that might lead to
conflicts of interest.
Membership in volunteer organizations such as ACM may at times
place individuals in situations where their statements or actions could
be interpreted as carrying the "weight" of a larger group of profes
sionals. An ACM member will exercise care to not misrepresent ACM or
positions and policies of ACM or any ACM units.
1.4 Be fair and take action not to discriminate.
The values of equality, tolerance, respect for others, and the prin
ciples of equal justice govern this imperative. Discrimination on the
basis of race, sex, religion, age, disability, national origin, or
other such factors is an explicit violation of ACM policy and will not
be tolerated.
Inequities between different groups of people may result from the
use or misuse of information and technology. In a fair society, all
individuals would have equal opportunity to participate in, or benefit
from, the use of computer resources regardless of race, sex, religion,
age, disability, national origin or other such similar factors. How
ever, these ideals do not justify unauthorized use of computer
resources nor do they provide an adequate basis for violation of any
other ethical imperatives of this code.
1.5 Honor property rights including copyrights and patents.
Violation of copyrights, patents, trade secrets and the terms of
license agreements is prohibited by law in most circumstances. Even
when software is not so protected, such violations are contrary to
professional behavior. Copies of software should be made only with
proper authorization. Unauthorized duplication of materials must not
be condoned.
1.6 Give proper credit for intellectual property
Computing professionals are obligated to protect the integrity of
intellectual property. Specifically, one must not take credit for
other's ideas or work, even in cases where the work has not been
explicitly protected by copyright, patent, etc.
1.7 Respect the privacy of others.
Computing and communication technology enables the collection and
exchange of personal information on a scale unprecedented in the his
tory of civilization. Thus there is increased potential for violating
the privacy of individuals and groups. It is the responsibility of
professionals to maintain the privacy and integrity of data describing
individuals. This includes taking precautions to ensure the accuracy
of data, as well as protecting it from unauthorized access or acciden
tal disclosure to inappropriate individuals. Furthermore, procedures
must be established to allow individuals to review their records and
correct inaccuracies.
This imperative implies that only the necessary amount of personal
information be collected in a system, that retention and disposal
periods for that information be clearly defined and enforced, and that
personal information gathered for a specific purpose not be used for
other purposes with the consent of the individual(s). These principles
apply to electronic communications, including electronic mail, and
prohibit procedures that capture or monitor electronic user data,
including messages, without the permission of users or bona fide
authorization related to system operation and maintenance. User data
observed during the normal duties of system operation and maintenance
must be treated with strictest confidentiality, except in cases where
it is evidence for the violation of law, organizational regulations, or
this Code. In these cases, the nature or contents of that information
must be disclosed only to proper authorities. (See 1.9)
1.8 Honor confidentiality.
The principle of honesty extends to issues of confidentiality of
information whenever one has made an explicit promise to honor confi
dentiality or, implicitly, when private information not directly
related to the performance of one's duties becomes available. The
ethical concern is to respect all obligations of confidentiality to
employers, clients, and users unless discharged from such obligations
by requirements of the law or other principles of this Code.
2. MORE SPECIFIC PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES. As an ACM computing
professional I will...
2.1 Strive to achieve the highest quality in both the process and
products of professional work.
Excellence is perhaps the most important obligation of a professional.
The computing profession must strive to achieve quality and to be cog
nizant of the serious negative consequences that may result from poor
quality in a system.
2.2 Acquire and maintain professional competence.
Excellence depends on individuals who take responsibility for acquiring
and maintaining professional competence. A professional must partici
pate in setting standards for appropriate levels of competence, and
strive to achieve those standards. Upgrading technical knowledge and
competence can be achieved in several ways: doing independent study,
attending seminars, conferences, or courses; and being involved in
professional organizations.
2.3 Know and respect existing laws pertaining to professional work.
ACM members must obey existing local, state, province, national and
international laws unless there is a compelling ethical basis not to do
so. Policies and procedures of the organizations in which one par
ticipates must also be obeyed. But compliance must be balanced with
the recognition that sometimes existing laws and rules may be immoral
or inappropriate and, therefore, must be challenged. Violation of a
law or regulation may be ethical when that law or rule has inadequate
moral basis or when it conflicts with another law judged to be more
important. If one decides to violate a law or rule because it is
viewed as unethical, or for any other reason, one must fully accept
responsibility for one's actions and the consequences.
2.4 Accept and provide appropriate professional review.
Quality professional work, especially in the computing profession,
depends on professional reviewing and critiquing. Whenever appropri
ate, individual members should seek and utilize peer review as well as
provide critical review of the work of others.
2.5 Give comprehensive and thorough evaluations of computer systems
and their impacts, including analysis of possible risks.
Computer professionals must strive to be perceptive, thorough, and
objective when evaluating, recommending, and presenting system
descriptions and alternatives. Computer professionals are in a posi
tion of special trust, and therefore have a special responsibility to
provide objective, credible evaluations to employers, clients, users,
and the public. When providing evaluations the professional must also
identify any relevant conflicts of interest as stated in imperative
1.3.
As noted in the discussion of principle 1.2 on avoiding harm, any
signs of danger from systems must be reported to those who have oppor
tunity and/or responsibility to resolve them. See the guidelines for
imperative 1.2 for more details concerning harm, including the report
ing of professional violations.
2.6 Honor contracts, agreements, and assigned responsibilities.
Honoring one's commitment is a matter of integrity and honesty. For
the computer professional this includes ensuring that system elements
perform as intended. Also, when one contracts for work with another
party, one has an obligation to keep that party properly informed about
progress toward completing that work.
A computing professional has a responsibility to request a change
in any assignment that he or she feels cannot be completed as defined.
Only after serious consideration and with full disclosure of risks and
concerns to the employer or client, should one accept the assignment.
The major underlying principle here is the obligation to accept per
sonal accountability for professional work. On some occasions other
ethical principles may take greater priority.
A judgment that a specific assignment should not be performed may
not be accepted. Having clearly identified one's concerns and reasons
for that judgment, but failing to procure a change in that assignment,
one may yet be obligated, by contract or by law, to proceed as
directed. The computing professional's ethical judgment should be the
final guide in deciding whether or not to proceed. Regardless of the
decision, one must accept the responsibility for the consequences.
However, performing assignments "against one's own judgment" does
not relieve the professional of responsibility for any negative conse
quences.
2.7 Improve public understanding of computing and its consequences.
Computing Professionals have a responsibility to share technical
knowledge with the public by encouraging understanding of computing,
including the impacts of computer systems and their limitations. This
imperative implies an obligation to counter any false views related to
computing.
2.8 Access computing and communication resources only when authorized
to do so.
Theft or destruction of tangible and electronic property is prohibited
by imperative 1.2 - "Avoid harm to others." Trespassing and unautho
rized use of a computer or communication system is addressed by this
imperative. Trespassing includes accessing communication networks and
computer systems, or accounts and/or files associated with those sys
tems, without explicit authority to do so. Individuals and
organizations have the right to restrict access to their systems so
long as they do not violate the discrimination principle (see 1.4). No
one should enter or use another's computer system, software, or data
files without permission. One must always have appropriate approval
before using system resources, including communication ports, file
space, other system peripherals, and computer time.
3. ORGANIZATIONAL LEADERSHIP IMPERATIVES. As an ACM member and an
organizational leader, I will...
BACKGROUND NOTE: This section draws extensively from the draft IFIP
Code of Ethics, especially its sections on organizational ethics and
international concerns. The ethical obligations or organizations tend
to be neglected in most codes of professional conduct, perhaps because
these codes are written from the perspective of the individual member.
This dilemma is addressed by stating these imperatives from the per
spective of the organizational leader. In this context "leader" is
viewed as any organizational member who has leadership or educational
responsibilities. These imperatives generally may apply to organiza
tions as well as their leaders. In this context "organizations" are
corporations, government agencies, and other "employers" as well as
volunteer professional organizations.
3.1 Articulate social responsibilities of members of an organizational
unit and encourage full acceptance of those responsibilities.
Because organizations of all kinds have impacts on the public, they
must accept responsibilities to society. Organizational procedures and
attitudes oriented toward quality and the welfare of society will
reduce harm to members of the public, thereby serving public interest
and fulfilling social responsibility. Therefore, organizational lead
ers must encourage full participation in meeting social
responsibilities as well as quality performance.
3.2 Manage personnel and resources to design and build information
systems that enhance the quality, effectiveness and dignity of working life.
Organizational leaders are responsible for ensuring that computer sys
tems enhance, not degrade, the quality of working life. When
implementing a computer system, organizations must consider the per
sonal and professional development, physical safety, and human dignity
of all workers. Appropriate human-computer ergonomic standards should
be considered in system design and in the workplace.
3.3 Acknowledge and support proper and authorized uses of an
organization's computing and communication resources.
Because computer systems can become tools to harm as well as benefit an
organization, the leadership has the responsibility to clearly define
appropriate and inappropriate uses of organizational computing
resources. While the number and scope of such rules should be minimal,
they should be fully enforced when established.
3.4 Ensure that users and those who will be affected by a computing
system have their needs clearly articulated during the assessment and
design of requirements; later the system must be validated to meet requirements.
Current system users, potential users and other persons whose lives may
be affected by a system must have their needs assessed and incorporated
in the statement of requirements. System validation should ensure
compliance with those requirements.
3.5 Articulate and support policies that protect the dignity of users
and other affected by a computing system.
Designing or implementing systems that deliberately or inadvertently
demean individuals or groups is ethically unacceptable. Computer pro
fessionals who are in decision making positions should verify that
systems are designed and implemented to protect personal privacy and
enhance personal dignity.
3.6 Create opportunities for members of the organization to learn the
principles and limitations of computer systems.
This complements the imperative on public understanding (2.7). Educa
tional opportunities are essential to facilitate optimal participation
of all organizational members. Opportunities must be available to all
members to help them improve their knowledge and skills in computing,
including courses that familiarize them with the consequences and
limitations of particular types of systems. In particular, profes
sionals must be aware of the dangers of building systems around
oversimplified models, the improbability of anticipating and designing
for every possible operating condition, and other issues related to the
complexity of this profession.
4. COMPLIANCE WITH THE CODE. As an ACM member, I will...
4.1 Uphold and promote the principles of this Code.
The future of the computing profession depends on both technical and
ethical excellence. Not only is it important for computing profes
sionals to adhere to the principles expressed in this Code, each member
should encourage and support adherence by other members.
4.2 Treat violations of this Code as inconsistent with membership in
the ACM.
Adherence by professionals to a code of ethics is largely a voluntary
matter. However, if a member does not follow this code by engaging in
gross misconduct, membership in ACM may be terminated.
--
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent EFF; this is just me.
=kadie@eff.org, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
From caf-talk Caf Nov 12 17:32:11 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: ACM Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct
Message-ID: <199211122232.AA24784@eff.org>
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 12:32:00 GMT
ACM Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct
Preamble. Commitment to ethical professional conduct is expected of every
member (voting members, associate members, and student members) of the
Association for Computing Machinery (ACM).
This Code, consisting of 24 imperatives formulated as statements of
responsibility, identifies the elements of such a commitment. It contains
many, but not all, issues professionals are likely to face. Section 1 outlines
fundamental ethical considerations, while Section 2 addresses additional, more
specific considerations of professional conduct. Statements in Section 3
pertain more specifically to individuals who have a leadership role, whether in
the workplace or in a volunteer capacity such as with organizations like ACM.
Principles involving compliance with this Code are given in Section 4.
The Code shall be supplemented by a set of guidelines which provide
explanation to assist members in dealing with the various issues contained in
the Code. It is expected that the Guidelines will be changed more frequently
than the Code.
The Code and its supplementary Guidelines are intended to serve as a basis
for ethical decision making in the conduct of professional work. Secondarily,
to the violation of professional ethical standards.
It should be noted that although computing is not mentioned in the
imperatives of Section 1.0, the Code is concerned with how these fundamental
imperatives apply to one's conduct as a computing professional. These
which apply to computer ethics are derived from more general ethical principles.
It is understood that some words and phrases in a code of ethics are
subject to varying interpretations, and that any ethical principle may conflict
with other ethical principles in specific situations. Questions related to
ethical conflicts can best be answered by thoughtful consideration of
fundamental principles, rather than reliance on detailed regulations.
1. GENERAL MORAL IMPERATIVES. As an ACM member I will...
1.1 Contribute to society and human well-being.
1.2 Avoid harm to others.
1.3 Be honest and trustworthy.
1.4 Be fair and take action not to discriminate.
1.5 Honor property rights including copyrights and patents.
1.6 Give proper credit for intellectual property
1.7 Respect the privacy of others.
1.8 Honor confidentiality.
2. MORE SPECIFIC PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES. As an ACM
computing professional I will...
2.1 Strive to achieve the highest quality in both the process and
products of professional work.
2.2 Acquire and maintain professional competence.
2.3 Know and respect existing laws pertaining to professional work.
2.4 Accept and provide appropriate professional review.
2.5 Give comprehensive and thorough evaluations of computer systems
and their impacts, including analysis of possible risks.
2.6 Honor contracts, agreements, and assigned responsibilities.
2.7 Improve public understanding of computing and its consequences.
2.8 Access computing and communication resources only when
authorized to do so.
3. ORGANIZATIONAL LEADERSHIP IMPERATIVES. As an ACM
member and an organizational leader, I will...
3.1 Articulate social responsibilities of members of an organizational
unit and encourage full acceptance of those responsibilities.
3.2 Manage personnel and resources to design and build information
systems that enhance the quality, effectiveness and dignity of
working life.
3.3 Acknowledge and support proper and authorized uses of an
organization's computing and communication resources.
3.4 Ensure that users and those who will be affected by a computing
system have their needs clearly articulated during the assessment
and design of requirements; later the system must be validated to
meet requirements.
3.5 Articulate and support policies that protect the dignity of users and
others affected by a computing system.
3.6 Create opportunities for members of the organization to learn the
principles and limitations of computer systems.
4. COMPLIANCE WITH THE CODE. As an ACM member, I will...
4.1 Uphold and promote the principles of this Code.
4.2 Treat violations of this Code as inconsistent with membership in
the ACM.
--
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent EFF; this is just me.
=kadie@eff.org, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
From caf-talk Caf Nov 12 17:38:59 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: gaddieml@lp.musc.edu
Subject: CAF
Message-ID: <00963839.A06281A0.25152@lp.musc.edu>
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 22:37:45 GMT
add comp-academic-freedom-news
THX, Marsha JCC class of '82
THX, Marsha JCC class of '82
From caf-talk Caf Nov 12 17:43:59 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: Cal State Fresno Policy
Message-ID: <9211122243.AA19730@herodotus.cs.uiuc.edu>
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 10:43:45 GMT
Department of Computer Science Policy on Computer Use
California State University, Fresno
August 1992
The Department of Computer Science and California State University, Fresno
provide computing resources to students, faculty and staff in support
of programs of the Department. Computing resources includes local
area networks and connections to other computer networks.
All students, faculty, and staff are responsible for seeing that
computing resources are used in an effective, ethical, and
lawful manner.
The Department disclaims responsibility for the loss of data or
interference with files resulting from its efforts to maintain the
privacy and security of the Department's computer facilities.
The following policies relate to the use of Departmental facilities.
These policies are in addition to existing University policies on
plagiarism and appropriate use of facilities.
1. Computer facilities are owned by the University or Department
and are to be used for Department-related activities only. Facilities
will not be used for private consulting, other commercial purposes,
or the installation of fraudulently or illegally obtained software or
data.
2. An account assigned to an individual by the Department must not
be used by others. The individual is responsible for the proper use of
the account, including password protection. The individual must
take all reasonable precautions, including password maintenance and
file and directory protection measures, to prevent use of their
account by unauthorized persons.
3. Programs and files are confidential unless they have explicitly
been made available to other authorized users. Copying, renaming,
changing, examining, or deleting files belonging to someone else is
against policy. Department faculty and staff may access others' files
when necessary for the maintenance of the computing facilities. When
preforming maintenance, however, every effort will be made to insure
the privacy of users' files.
4. Departmental computing resources, including electronic mail and
other electronic communication, will not be used to annoy others. It
is against policy to send obscene, abusive, or threatening messages.
5. Attempts to bypass standard procedures are not allowed. This
includes, but is not limited to, attempts to discover another user's
password, taking resources from other users, distribution or execution
of a program that damages another user's files or Departmental
computing resources, and gaining access to resources for which proper
authorization has not been given.
6. Physical tampering with departmental resources is not allowed.
7. Users will not deliberately attempt to degrade system performance or
to deprive authorized users access to Departmental computing resources.
Failure to comply with the above guidelines shall constitute a violation
of Department policy and will subject the violator to disciplinary or
legal action by the Department or University. In addition, the
University may require restitution for any use of computing resources
that is in violation of the above guidelines.
Users of Departmental computing resources are also subject to local,
state, and federal laws.
From caf-talk Caf Nov 12 17:58:21 1992
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,soc.libraries.talk,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,alt.sex,rec.arts.books
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [UPI] Library attacked for buying Madonna's Sex book
Message-ID:
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 22:51:28 GMT
Copyright 1992 by UPI. Reposted with permission from the ClariNet
Electronic Newspaper newsgroup clari.clari.local.texas,clari.news.sex.
For more info on ClariNet, write to info@clarinet.com or phone
1-800-USE-NETS.
HOUSTON (UPI) -- The president of Citizens Against Pornography says
she plans to file a complaint with the City Hall to protest the Houston
Public Library ordering of four copies of Madonna's controversial book
Sex which contains pictures of sex poses.
Geneva Kirk Brooks also called for the resignation of library
director David Henington.
``I cannot believe this. They are going to put Madonna's Sex book in
the public library,'' Brooks said. ``Who does the public library belong
to? It belongs to the people.''
The libaray ordered four copies of the book at $49.95 each with money
provided by an anonymous donor. Two of the copeis will be used for
general circulation in the Fine Arts section and two will be used in the
Reference section, said David Bates, library spokesman. He said the book
are on back-order.
He said despite the controversy, the book has a proper place in the
library.
``Madonna is a cultural phenomenon,'' he said. ``Most of what she
does is news. And our patrons would have an interest in what she's
doing.''
Bates said the book is not pornographic. ``It's being sold legally in
mainstream book retailers,'' he said.
Brooks, who has picketed convenience stores for selling Playboy and
Penthouse magazines, said the book violates the city's community
standards resolution that was drafted by the City CVouncil in 1978.
``It shows indication that she is invovled with bestiality,'' Brooks
said, referring to a photograph depicting a topless Madonna leaning over
a dog. ``What moral values does a book like Madonna's have for anybody?''
--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
From caf-talk Caf Nov 12 19:00:15 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,alt.censorship
From: noring@netcom.com (Jon Noring)
Subject: Re: 24-hour notice: anonymus@godiva going down
Message-ID: <1992Nov12.231948.4079@netcom.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 23:19:48 GMT
I'm forwarding the following post from alt.personals, without comment.
**********************************************************************
In article anonymus+0@godiva.nectar.cs.cmu.edu (Karl Kleinpaste, ACS administrator) writes:
You have mxsst1@vms.cis.pitt.edu, aka anonymus+1118, to thank for this.
It seems that "the red flag is raised." Whereas local facilities
staff had previously been aware of, and (perhaps grudgingly) condoned
the existence of, anonymus@godiva.nectar.cs.cmu.edu (I mean, crud, the
local Manager of Systems Programming had given his "seems innocuous
enough" about it)...
As of this morning, and due specifically to complaints about the
above-named user, facilities staff have gained an entirely new
awareness and perspective, being an utter distaste for the service's
existence. Godiva has (rather abusively, in my opinion) been forced
into standards compliance with the rest of cs.cmu.edu, and I have been
ordered to dismantle the system.
You have 24 hours in which to contact correspondents and either
exchange real email addresses or else find other means by which to
remain in contact.
Apologies to the vast majority of legitimate, decent users of the
system, some 3068 people. And may the few abusers of it, who managed
to be its downfall even being such a minority, just rot in hell.
I want to know something REALLY IMPORTANT... Has pitt.edu got some
sort of hammerlock on the "Highest Population Density of Publicly
Abusive Email Users" award? Between this jackass and our good friend
of the alt.personals photo fiasco, not to mention a couple of private
complaints I've had, you'd think nearly the entire population of the
world's email morons lived about 5 blocks from where I now sit.
Eight weeks, birth to death.
--
No test posting. To use this service, mail to (note misspelling, "anonymus"):
Anonymous posting: anonymus+name.of.news.group@godiva.nectar.cs.cmu.edu
Anonymous mail: user's-alias@godiva.nectar.cs.cmu.edu
Test path/get alias: anonymus+ping@godiva.nectar.cs.cmu.edu
Assign nickname: anonymus+nick@godiva.nectar.cs.cmu.edu (in Subject:)
Anon administrator: anonymus+0@godiva.nectar.cs.cmu.edu (anonymously)
anonymus+admin@godiva.nectar.cs.cmu.edu (non-anon)
****************************************************************************
--
=============================================================================
| Jon Noring | noring@netcom.com | "The dogs bark, but the |
| JKN International | IP : 192.100.81.100 | caravan moves on." |
| 1312 Carlton Place | Phone : (510) 294-8153 | "Pack your lunch, sit in |
| Livermore, CA 94550 | V-Mail: (510) 862-1101 | the bushes, and watch." |
=============================================================================
"If your annual income today is $50,000, you have the same buying power as
the average coal miner did in 1949, adjusted for taxes and inflation," John
Sestina, nationally recognized Certified Financial Planner; quoted in 1987.
-------> I VOTED FOR PEROT IN '92
-------> support UNITED WE STAND!
From caf-talk Caf Nov 13 00:57:17 1992
From: sean@cobra.dra.com
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,soc.libraries.talk,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,alt.sex,rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: [UPI] Library attacked for buying Madonna's Sex book
Message-ID: <1992Nov12.233650.20@cobra.dra.com>
Date: 12 Nov 92 23:36:50 CST
In article , kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
> He said despite the controversy, the book has a proper place in the
> library.
> ``Madonna is a cultural phenomenon,'' he said. ``Most of what she
> does is news. And our patrons would have an interest in what she's
> doing.''
> Bates said the book is not pornographic. ``It's being sold legally in
> mainstream book retailers,'' he said.
It should be interesting how long he stays with that opinion. The St. Louis
(City) Public Library had ordered six copies of "Sex." They had over 70
requests for the book before it was even published. The city library said
that only persons over eighteen would be allowed to look at, or check out
the book. The day after the newspaper reported the library had ordered the
books, the library cancelled the order. The library director reported they
had received a large number of complaints about the planned purchase. He
said that their librarians had obtained a copy of the book, and upon further
review decided not to purchase it. I don't have a copy of the articles, but
the quotes were the standard "spending tax money for pornography," and "it
wasn't censorship since people could always go buy the book from a bookstore."
The St. Louis County Public Library (independent from the city) had decided
not to order the book either. The county library gave several reasons for
not ordering the book. 1. It had received poor reviews. 2. It was spiral
bound (doesn't hold up well). 3. Didn't appear to have "lasting value." and
4. Too expensive.
Although though the county library didn't order the book, they also have a
program of not allowing children to check out certain books or videotapes.
Even the computer system is programmed to block checking out "minus" material
on a children's card. That was merely the continuation of a policy that
had been in place before they installed the automated circulation system.
Parents can ask to have this restriction removed for their child's card,
but by default all children's cards are restricted.
--
Sean Donelan, Data Research Associates, Inc, St. Louis, MO
Domain: sean@sdg.dra.com, Voice: (Work) +1 314-432-1100
From caf-talk Caf Nov 13 06:41:05 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,mi.misc
From: jp@tygra.Michigan.COM (John Palmer)
Subject: No Due Process at Wayne State Univ. (was Re: Cal State Fresno Policy)
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 05:06:04 GMT
Message-ID: <1992Nov13.040605.10946JPII@tygra.Michigan.COM>
In article <9211122243.AA19730@herodotus.cs.uiuc.edu> kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
" Department of Computer Science Policy on Computer Use
" California State University, Fresno
" August 1992
"
Nice to see that another University has one of these. Would someone from
Wayne State University post their policy, including, of course, the parts
where due process for students whose accounts have been terminated is
described. What? You mean that there is no due process? (I'm being
sarcastic, of course - I know for a fact that the WSU C&IT can and does
terminate student computer access and doesn't provide any due process
clause in their Student Account Policy).
--
Clinton/Gore in '92 | E-MAIL: jp@michigan.com CAT-TALK IS BACK as a FREE
PUTTING PEOPLE FIRST | SYSTEM!! 313-882-2209 300-14400 V.32/V.32BIS/TurboPEP
bye-bye Georgie.... | Anon-UUCP: System: tygra, Login: nuucp, no pw
Its been a bitch... | Get file "/cat/pub/filelist" for a list of files.
***************************************************************************
From caf-talk Caf Nov 13 09:14:58 1992
From: v462etnn@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (David L Anderson)
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,soc.libraries.talk,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,alt.sex,rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: [UPI] Library attacked for buying Madonna's Sex book
Message-ID:
Date: 13 Nov 92 13:57:00 GMT
In article <1992Nov12.233650.20@cobra.dra.com>, sean@cobra.dra.com writes...
>In article , kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
>> He said despite the controversy, the book has a proper place in the
>> library.
>> ``Madonna is a cultural phenomenon,'' he said. ``Most of what she
>> does is news. And our patrons would have an interest in what she's
>> doing.''
>> Bates said the book is not pornographic. ``It's being sold legally in
>> mainstream book retailers,'' he said.
>
The Buffalo and Erie County Public Library has four copies. They
ordered them long before they came out. So far, there's only
been one article in the paper (Wednesday, 11/11) -- a councilman
from Cheektowaga has voiced his complaints about it. The lib
director said essentially the same thing as above, both in the
paper and on the 11 o'clock news. Interesting note: two copies
are on permanent reserve, two are circulating. Given the public's
proclivities about this book, make that only two copies the library
owns.
David Anderson
Medaille College Library
From caf-talk Caf Nov 13 09:55:08 1992
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,soc.libraries.talk,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,alt.sex,rec.arts.books
From: kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: Re: [UPI] Library attacked for buying Madonna's Sex book
Message-ID: <1992Nov13.145500.4472@eff.org>
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 14:55:00 GMT
If your newspaper has an article about _Sex_ and censorship, please
consider sending the article to the _Newsletter on Intellectual
Freedom_. (Please send them other newspaper reports of challenges and
censorship, too. They've printed at least one computer censorship
report.)
This rest of this article is a repost from October, 1991:
========================
The American Library Assocation has a bimonthly newsletter that
reports on censorship (of all kinds). To report censorship to them
send a copy of a newspaper articles that documents the censorship to:
Newsletter on Intellectual Freedom
Office for Intellectual Freedom
American Library Association
50 East Huron Street
Chicago, IL 60611
If the censorship involves academic computers, I'd also love to get a
copy of relevant newspapers articles. Send me email for mailing
information.
- Carl
--
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent EFF; this is just me.
=kadie@eff.org, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
From caf-talk Caf Nov 13 10:37:21 1992
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,soc.libraries.talk,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,alt.sex,rec.arts.books
From: jones@pyrite.cs.uiowa.edu (Douglas W. Jones,201H MLH,3193350740,3193382879)
Subject: Re: [UPI] Library attacked for buying Madonna's Sex book
Message-ID: <1992Nov13.150520.23493@news.uiowa.edu>
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 15:05:20 GMT
Three libraries in Iowa, that I know of, have ordered the book.
There was a vocal complaint in Des Moines, and I don't know how things will
end there.
In Cedar Rapids, when someone from the press contacted the local library,
the director responded (and I believe I'm quoting correctly) "It would take
a court order to make us take any book off our shelves."
In Iowa City, the gave comments comparable to those quoted by others, that
Madonna is a cultural phenomenon, etc.
Personally, I like the attitude of the Cedar Rapids Public Library, terse
and to the point.
Doug Jones
jones@cs.uiowa.edu
From caf-talk Caf Nov 13 12:29:24 1992
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,soc.libraries.talk,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,alt.sex,rec.arts.books
From: john@iastate.edu (John Hascall)
Subject: Re: [UPI] Library attacked for buying Madonna's Sex book
Message-ID:
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 17:08:05 GMT
jones@pyrite.cs.uiowa.edu (Douglas W. Jones,...) writes:
}Three libraries in Iowa, that I know of, have ordered the book.
}There was a vocal complaint in Des Moines, and I don't know how things will
}end there.
Mayor and City Council got all bent out of shape - told library board to
reconsider - library board reconsidered (rather briefly :) - decided to keep.
(library board has final say)
}In Cedar Rapids,...
}In Iowa City,...
In Ames, "We have to look out for a wide variety of interests in Ames,
the library should be a place of access, not restriction."
Dawn Hayslett, Asst Dir Ames Public Library (as quoted by _ISU Daily_)
(it will be on the shelves after all the people on the reserve list
return it, probably many months from now).
The ISU Library does not have a copy,
"The intellectual freedom issue is not really a problem,
it's more a lack of requests."
Gordon Rowley, Asst Dir for Collections, ISU Library (_ISU Daily_)
John
--
John Hascall ``An ill-chosen word is the fool's messenger.''
Systems Software Engineer
Project Vincent
Iowa State University Computation Center + Ames, IA 50011 + 515/294-9551
From caf-talk Caf Nov 13 13:16:35 1992
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,soc.libraries.talk,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,alt.sex,rec.arts.books
From: kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: Re: [UPI] Library attacked for buying Madonna's Sex book
Message-ID: <1992Nov13.181628.8561@eff.org>
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 18:16:28 GMT
john@iastate.edu (John Hascall) writes:
[...]
>In Ames, "We have to look out for a wide variety of interests in Ames,
> the library should be a place of access, not restriction."
> Dawn Hayslett, Asst Dir Ames Public Library (as quoted by _ISU Daily_)
[...]
Contrast this with the Iowa State U. policy on Netnews that
restricts alt.sex.
== Excerpts from ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/policies/netnews.iastate.edu ==
[...]
The purpose of this statement is to provide a brief overview of Usenet News, a
description of challenges that accompany this technology, and the Computation
Center's policy on this issue.
[...]
Some university sites in other locations have already come under internal and
external criticism for the use of state and federal funds to store and
distribute items which are alleged [...] to be [...] objectionable.
[...]
Some of the material provided through Usenet has been objectionable to some
members of the university community. [...]
[...]
With the academic freedom of the campus environment goes individual
intellectual responsibility. Hallmarks of that responsibility are to obtain
and use material in manners which respect others in the campus community;
[...]
--
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent EFF; this is just me.
=kadie@eff.org, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
From caf-talk Caf Nov 13 14:56:54 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,alt.censorship
From: noring@netcom.com (Jon Noring)
Subject: The Other Side of the Story (was Re: 24-hour notice...)
Message-ID: <1992Nov13.192122.26652@netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 19:21:22 GMT
************************************************************************
Note, I'm crossposting this from alt.sex. Yesterday, I cross-posted the
message from Karl Kleinpaste. There are two sides to every story. Now,
let's hear from Rob (rreilly@Athena.MIT.EDU) to get all sides. This is
getting more interesting as facts unfold. No further comment yet.
************************************************************************
In article mxsst1+@pitt.edu (Michael Stroucken) writes:
I, Michael Stroucken, take position to the recent allegations about my part
in bringing down godiva.
In article anonymus+0@godiva.nectar.cs.cmu.edu (Karl Kleinpaste, ACS administrator) writes:
>You have mxsst1@vms.cis.pitt.edu, aka anonymus+1118, to thank for this.
>
>Apologies to the vast majority of legitimate, decent users of the
>system, some 3068 people. And may the few abusers of it, who managed
>to be its downfall even being such a minority, just rot in hell.
>
i. e. rreilly@athena.mit.edu See following letter.
>
>Eight weeks, birth to death.
>
Following is a letter I received suddenly and surprisingly.
Return-path:
X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 0;pitt.edu;Network-Mail
Received: from pitt.edu via trymail
ID ;
Wed, 11 Nov 1992 21:18:59 -0500 (EST)
Received: from Athena.MIT.EDU (ATHENA-AS-WELL.MIT.EDU) by pitt.edu with SMTP id AA04220
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4.5); Wed, 11 Nov 1992 21:18:52 -0500
Received: from E40-008-11.MIT.EDU by Athena.MIT.EDU with SMTP
id AA13194; Wed, 11 Nov 92 21:18:48 EST
Received: by e40-008-11.MIT.EDU (5.61/4.7) id AA22404; Wed, 11 Nov 92 21:18:44 -0500
Message-Id: <9211120218.AA22404@e40-008-11.MIT.EDU>
To: postmaster@pitt.edu
Cc: postmaster@cmu.edu, mxsst1@pitt.edu
Subject: Problem User
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 21:18:43 EST
From: Rob Reilly
Hello All,
I am a member of the board of directors of K12Net. K12Net, among
things, is the k12.* newsgroups on USENET. We are having a problem
with a user from both your sites - the same fellow.
Michael Stroucken seems to be the owner of the two accounts
(mxsst1@pitt.edu and anonymus+1118@godiva.nectar.cs.cmu.edu). Michael
is posting obscene messages in our k12.lang.deutsch-eng newsgroup. We
have contacted Michael and he has indicated that his viewpoint in this
matter will prevale. He believes that he can do as he will.
END QUOTE.
CONTRADICTION: First of all, I did not post any obscene message into a
newsgroup. Secondly, I never posted anything under my godiva username
into that newsgroup, my signature creator automatically adds all addresses
under which I can be reached. Thirdly, you never contacted me, and I never
confronted anyone with the intent to keep posting what was not welcome in
that newsgroup. Fourth, you never contacted me before, and this letter reached
me in surprise.
Reading that newsgroup(if you can read german), you can see
that I was criticised early this month for posting what the moderator didn't
consider appropriate, so I unsubscribed to that newsgroup on the 8th of
November. Then yesterday, I got this letter, filled to the brim with
bullshit and false allegations.
BEGIN QUOTE
I would ask together that we deal with this problem.
Thank you for your attention.
I am looking forwward to hearing from you.
-Rob-
END LETTER.
Immediately after I recieved this letter, I sent of an Email denial to all
involved.
Seeing godiva go down because of this mushforbrains unsubstantiated accusation
is sad, but not too much can be done, since the feed belongs to cmu, and
bad publicity is one thing they don't want to have.
If you need to flame someone about godiva's death, Rob Reilly is the person.
All flames addressed to me will go to bit hell.
Michael Stroucken
PS: An example of the my signature can be seen below, that's where he got
godiva's address from.
--
Schwester! Zange! ... Tupfer! ... Sterbeurkunde!
Internet: mxsst1@pitt.edu, anonymus+1118@godiva.nectar.cs.cmu.edu :)
********************************
end of cross-post.
--
=============================================================================
| Jon Noring | noring@netcom.com | "The dogs bark, but the |
| JKN International | IP : 192.100.81.100 | caravan moves on." |
| 1312 Carlton Place | Phone : (510) 294-8153 | "Pack your lunch, sit in |
| Livermore, CA 94550 | V-Mail: (510) 862-1101 | the bushes, and watch." |
=============================================================================
"If your annual income today is $50,000, you have the same buying power as
the average coal miner did in 1949, adjusted for taxes and inflation," John
Sestina, nationally recognized Certified Financial Planner; quoted in 1987.
-------> I VOTED FOR PEROT IN '92
-------> support UNITED WE STAND!
From caf-talk Caf Nov 13 15:19:09 1992
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,soc.libraries.talk,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,alt.sex,rec.arts.books
From: parker@navier.math.uh.edu (Ronald L. Parker)
Subject: Re: [UPI] Library attacked for buying Madonna's Sex book
Message-ID:
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 19:47:42 GMT
In article , kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
>> He said despite the controversy, the book has a proper place in the
>> library.
>> ``Madonna is a cultural phenomenon,'' he said. ``Most of what she
>> does is news. And our patrons would have an interest in what she's
>> doing.''
>> Bates said the book is not pornographic. ``It's being sold legally in
>> mainstream book retailers,'' he said.
Since the happy ending is unlikely to go out over the wire, here's the story
from today's Houston Chronicle (reprinted without permission - don't sue me,
I have no money, I don't speak for UH and they don't speak for me, and so on)
----8<---- clip here ----
``Patrons give library `Sex' for the asking''
Houston Chronicle, November 13, 1992 (Stefanie Asin)
_Sex_ in a Houston public library: Now, you can have it too.
Although unintentional, the city's porn busters have made _Sex_
availablae to library patrons by prompting donations of five copies of
Madonna's steamy pictorial.
The books arrived two days avfter Geneva Kirk Brooks of Citizens Against
Pornography went before City Council to lambaste the library for ordering
the tome.
Ironically, the limited-edition book has been on back-order for commercial
customers like libraries, and there was no guarantee that Houston's would
receive it.
Now, pending cursory approval from a library committee, there will be
enough _Sex_ to go around.
``Now we are overflowing with bounty,'' said David Bates, the library's
public information officer.
One woman drove from Spring in pelting rain to donate a copy of the book
in the ``name of intellectual freedom everywhere,'' he said. Another donor
delivered four copies, and four more have been promised, Bates said.
The donors are just a few of dozens who have called the library this week.
Bates said about 60 percent of the calls have been unfavorable -- and some
even unpleasant. He's been called ``smut peddler'' and ``child abuser''
among other things, he said.
``I tell them, `No, no -- I'm just a flack.' ''
----8<---- clip here ----
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ron Parker, parker@navier.math.uh.edu, st1ca@jetson.uh.edu
What would be so wrong if Fred Rogers WAS running this country? --D. Letterman
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From caf-talk Caf Nov 13 16:47:16 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [comp.org.eff.talk] Re: Query: Can Universities limit network access &/or 'spy` on users?
Message-ID:
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 21:35:39 GMT
[A repost - Carl]
From caf-talk Caf Nov 13 16:47:16 1992
From: morgan@engr.uky.edu (Wes Morgan)
Subject: Re: Query: Can Universities limit network access &/or 'spy` on users?
Message-ID: <1992Nov13.144319.23661@ms.uky.edu>
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 19:43:18 GMT
michaelb@cse.fau.edu (Michael Rogero Brown) wrote:
>A member of ACC stated there that
>the reason students are denied network access is because they use it for
>'frivolous' activies as opposed to 'research' uses.
>
>What infuriates me is HOW WOULD THEY KNOW HOW PEOPLE ARE USING THIS STUFF?
>The only why I see that they would know is if they are spying on student
>activties, ie reading their mail to see if its serious or not, etc. Frankly
>this is totally unethical, but is it illegal? I would think users would have
>some right to privacy in their accounts from the sysadms spying on them.
[ I've already replied to Michael; I thought others might take interest ]
[ in this as well. ]
You should keep in mind that this information can be gathered via several
methods, several of which are non-intrusive.
Let's consider the first question:
Can we determine what a particular user is doing?
Under Unix, the commands "who", "finger", and "ps" can be used BY ANY USER
to build a fairly good picture of an individual's activity. Some Unix sys-
tems support the "last" and "lastcomm" utilities, which show the command
history of the specified users; again, these require no special privilege.
Under VMS, the SHOW and FINGER commands give information about a user's
current processes. Under RSTS/E and TOPS-10, the SYSTAT command gives
this information.
We may debate the propriety of these utilities, but they are available
(in most cases) to all users, without any special privilege.
Question #2:
Can we determine the network activity of a given system?
There are several packages (and builtin utilities) which will profile
and/or log network activity. Under Unix, the "netstat" command will
tell you the current connections in use; it does not assign individual
usernames to the connections (but the information from "ps" will enable
you to match them up). Again, ANY user could do this.
There are several packages which will profile the network activity on
a system level. For instance, NNStat can log every packet that comes
from or goes to a specific system; I'm sure that other packages can do
the same thing. Again, note that NNStat does NOT associate a particular
username with the traffic.
You mentioned that there are several systems which are used exclusively
by students. Were I at FAU, I could easily monitor the traffic to/from
that system, WITHOUT IDENTIFYING SPECIFIC USERS, and draw conclusions about
usage patterns. If I see that 50% of the network traffic from a given sys-
tem is going to MUDs/IRC/whatever (which are identified by the port number
in the packet), I can draw some conclusions WITHOUT IDENTIFYING SPECIFIC
USERS.
Question #3:
Can we track email traffic/usage?
Again, there are some utilities which, by default, are available to all users.
Under Unix, many systems support the "mailq" command, which lists all email
messages in the queue for delivery. Unless the admins specifically restrict
that command, ANY USER could gather such information.
In addition, most mail delivery agents (sendmail, smail, etc.) maintain logs
of all email transactions. For instance, my logs include:
Sender's address
Recipient's address
Date/time of delivery
Size
Status (sent, deferred, error, etc.)
>From this information, an admin COULD draw a complete picture of an individual
user's email usage (I have never done so, except on request by the user). How-
ever, this information is often used to profile email services. I have a file
which includes the "well known" mailing list addresses; I use this to estimate
our users' participation in such lists. (NOTE: I do this without digging up
who is subscribed to what list, and I don't even publicize the lists which are
used; it's just beneficial to be able to say "our users are participating with
other universities on a regular basis through XXX mailing lists.")
[ Before you argue that these logs should not be kept, let me point out that ]
[ they are ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL in troubleshooting; without them, I would ]
[ never be able to find/resolve problems in email service. ]
In addition, many systems run accounting packages which compile various
statistics. For instance, my systems generate a monthly report which
lists:
- Total CPU/disk/connect time activity of all users (ranked by
CPU usage)
- Total CPU/disk/real time usage of each program on the system
(ranked by CPU usage)
This information is often required by software licensors; for instance,
some licence costs vary with the amount of CPU used by the licensed program.
It can also be used to measure the impact of services such as Usenet news,
gopher, et cetera. (If "rn", "play", and "empire" burn up more time than
"cc", "f77", and "ld", your system may be mutating into a "recreational"
role.) I also use this information to adjust quotas, justify additional
diskspace, and beg for bigger systems. 8)
In conclusion, it is quite possible that your admins have determined/extracted
this information in a non-intrusive fashion. If you don't trust your admins
(*sigh*), I would suggest that you:
- Ask for statistics which justify their assertions
- Ask how the statistics were gathered
- Ask about the distribution (if any) of the information
- Ask about the longevity (if any) of the information (some sites
keep accounting and log files for long periods of time)
Your accusations (explicit and implicit) may not be justified.
--Wes
--
MORGAN@UKCC | Wes Morgan | ...!ukma!ukecc!morgan
morgan@ms.uky.edu | Engineering Computing | morgan@wuarchive.wustl.edu
morgan@engr.uky.edu | University of Kentucky | JWMorgan@dockmaster.ncsc.mil
Mailing list for AT&T StarServer S/E - starserver-request@engr.uky.edu
--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
From caf-talk Caf Nov 13 20:30:00 1992
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,soc.libraries.talk,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,alt.sex,rec.arts.books
From: twain@milton.u.washington.edu (Barbara Hlavin)
Subject: Re: [UPI] Library attacked for buying Madonna's Sex book
Message-ID: <1992Nov13.225907.27781@u.washington.edu>
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 22:59:07 GMT
In article kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
>
> HOUSTON (UPI) -- The president of Citizens Against Pornography says
>she plans to file a complaint with the City Hall to protest the Houston
>Public Library ordering of four copies of Madonna's controversial book
>Sex which contains pictures of sex poses.
> The libaray ordered four copies of the book at $49.95 each with money
>provided by an anonymous donor. Two of the copeis will be used for
>general circulation in the Fine Arts section and two will be used in the
>Reference section
Reference??
Is this the same library that shelved Adrienne Rich's _An Atlas of
the Difficult World_ in Geography?
--Barbara
From caf-talk Caf Nov 14 02:42:36 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: ckcs!marc.wolfe@ms.uky.edu
Subject: a
Message-ID: <94.7.uupcb@ckcs.uucp>
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 00:54:00 GMT
From caf-talk Caf Nov 14 16:36:05 1992
From: ygoland@edison.seas.ucla.edu (The Jester)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
Subject: Re: right to have .plan
Message-ID: <8661@lee.SEAS.UCLA.EDU>
Date: 14 Nov 92 20:40:51 GMT
A question was raised regarding the inclusion of biblical material
in a .plan. It was generally agreeded that the person who found this
offense should go "whistle up a rope".
But I would propose another scenerio for examination:A professor at
a major university teachers a class where all of the students have
class accounts and hence access to finger. He tells those students
the information regarding the timing of tests and hints on homework
are available at all times just by fingering him (i.e. he put the
info in his plan file). However the professor also included in his
.plan file biblical and other quotes. Should he have to take them
out? She he be forced to use another means to inform the students of
the pertinant information?
The issue is the difference between when you CHOOSE to read a .plan
and when you HAVE to read a .plan.
In the real world many of my professors give their office hours and
such through their .plan. Its convienent.
Jester
--
The Jester
"Freedom isn't Free"-The U.S. Army
"Nothing is too wonderful to be true"-Faraday
"If I knew it all, what would I be doing HERE?"-The Jester
From caf-talk Caf Nov 14 19:35:17 1992
From: magus@drktowr.chi.il.us (Louis Giliberto)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
Subject: Re: right to have .plan
Message-ID: <9211137329@drktowr.chi.il.us>
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 00:33:28 CST6CDT
Carl M. Kadie (kadie@eff.org) wrote:
: At a state university such as U. of Virginia, freedom of expression is
: protected even on/within University resources. People who don't care
: for your .plan can easily ignore or avoid it, just as they can easily
: ignore or avoid a "Quad Preacher" for whom the do no care.
:
: - Carl
Like "Mad Max"? heheh. The guy kinda grows on ya after a while.
But seriously...I believe that not only what you (the young
lady, not Carl heheh) said is protected not only by your right to free speech,
but also by your freedom of religion.
I can put whatever I would like to in my .sig (though I personally
would keep it without "f**k" and other such niceties), and there is
not really anything anyone can do about it. The Internet is not
under the FCC's jurisdiction, so as long as it's not illegal, there
really isn't anything anyone can say about it. Most newsreaders let
you autocancel a particular person's posts, so they can avoid it at
their benefit.
So if I were you, I would not only have it in my .plan, but also in my
.sig. If your religion and beliefs are important to you, they should
be there since the .plan and .sig are "one-liners" letting people
know about you.
I hope you don't let those people get to you, and just be true to
yourself and your god whomever he/she that may be.
"Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law"
--Aleister Crowley
"Father, if it is your will, take this cup from me; yet not my will but
yours be done." [LK 22:43] --Jesus Christ
(Just to make sure I annoy the broadest amount of people possible even
though both are saying the same things.)
-Louis
--
---------------------------------------------------------
Louis J. Giliberto, Jr. ! magus@drktowr.chi.il.us
-sysadmin drktowr ! lgilibe@orion.it.luc.edu
Chicago, IL USA !
---------------------------------------------------------
From caf-talk Caf Nov 14 21:39:31 1992
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: russotto@eng.umd.edu (Matthew T. Russotto)
Subject: Re: right to have .plan
Message-ID: <1992Nov15.022727.16660@eng.umd.edu>
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 02:27:27 GMT
In article <8661@lee.SEAS.UCLA.EDU> ygoland@edison.seas.ucla.edu (The Jester) writes:
>A question was raised regarding the inclusion of biblical material
>in a .plan. It was generally agreeded that the person who found this
>offense should go "whistle up a rope".
>
>But I would propose another scenerio for examination:A professor at
>a major university teachers a class where all of the students have
>class accounts and hence access to finger. He tells those students
>the information regarding the timing of tests and hints on homework
>are available at all times just by fingering him (i.e. he put the
>info in his plan file). However the professor also included in his
>.plan file biblical and other quotes. Should he have to take them
>out? She he be forced to use another means to inform the students of
>the pertinant information?
>
>The issue is the difference between when you CHOOSE to read a .plan
>and when you HAVE to read a .plan.
>
>In the real world many of my professors give their office hours and
>such through their .plan. Its convienent.
This situation seems about equivalent to putting bible quotes in a
syllabus-- it's inappropriate and unethical. But I don't think it is
a problem for the computer administration, any more than a printed syllabus
with biblical quotes would be a problem for the campus print shop.
The students should take it up with the professor's academic
superiors.
--
Matthew T. Russotto russotto@eng.umd.edu russotto@wam.umd.edu
Some news readers expect "Disclaimer:" here.
Just say NO to police searches and seizures. Make them use force.
(not responsible for bodily harm resulting from following above advice)
From caf-talk Caf Nov 14 21:54:05 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: barnhart@ddsw1.mcs.com (Mr. Aaron Barnhart)
Subject: Re: Cal State Fresno Policy
Message-ID:
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1992 01:44:03 GMT
kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) wrote:
: Department of Computer Science Policy on Computer Use
: California State University, Fresno
: August 1992
:
:The Department disclaims responsibility for the loss of data or
:interference with files resulting from its efforts to maintain the
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
:privacy and security of the Department's computer facilities.
This is commonplace?
Aaron
From caf-talk Caf Nov 14 23:04:18 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [comp.org.eff.talk] Re: right to have .plan
Message-ID:
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 03:48:46 GMT
[A repost - Carl]
From caf-talk Caf Nov 14 23:04:18 1992
From: tinsel@uiuc.edu (Thomas Aaron Insel)
Subject: Re: right to have .plan
Message-ID:
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 02:24:47 GMT
ygoland@edison.seas.ucla.edu (The Jester) writes:
> But I would propose another scenerio for examination:A professor at
> a major university teachers a class where all of the students have
> class accounts and hence access to finger. He tells those students
> the information regarding the timing of tests and hints on homework
> are available at all times just by fingering him (i.e. he put the
> info in his plan file). However the professor also included in his
> .plan file biblical and other quotes. Should he have to take them
> out? She he be forced to use another means to inform the students of
> the pertinant information?
No. He wouldn't be asked to remove them from, for example, his
office door. He wouldn't have to tell his students, ``My office
hours are from 9-12:30 on Tuesdays and Thursdays, but I have a
quote from Leviticus on the wall of my office.'' Therefore, this
should be acceptable.
--
Thomas Insel (tinsel@uiuc.edu)
"Familiarity breeds contempt--and children." -- Mark Twain
--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
From caf-talk Caf Nov 15 09:37:01 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.d, et al.] Re: Do laws apply in the traditional sense to the net?
Message-ID:
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 14:25:15 GMT
[A repost - Carl]
From caf-talk Caf Nov 15 09:37:01 1992
From: davecb@nexus.yorku.ca (David Collier-Brown)
Subject: Re: Do laws apply in the traditional sense to the net?
Message-ID:
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 03:43:27 GMT
hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M. Hartman) writes:
|I believe in the recent Canadian flap the consensus was that the Canadian
|site receiveing the feed from the US site had the responsibility to
|refuse to carry topics that would be illegal in Canada. (A simple
|request to put !alt.sex.bondage (I think) in the sys file of the feed
|site).
Maybe the consensus on the net, but not in Canada! My university
is a signatory of the CLA (Canadian Library Association)
statement on academic freedoms, and therefor does not presume to try
to censor newsfeeds.
The senate deliberated, and so ruled.
Besides, we don't dare pretend to be more than a common carrier,
lest we really get into trouble!
If someone does want to censor our feed, they always have the
option to get a court order based on a real incident and canadian
precedent. We normally obey lawfull orders (:-)).
--dave c-b
--
David Collier-Brown, | davecb@CCS.YorkU.CA | lethe!dave
72 Abitibi Ave., |
Willowdale, Ontario, | York Postmaster and
CANADA. 416-223-8968 | occasional email consultant.
--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
From caf-talk Caf Nov 15 09:38:30 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.d, et al.] Re: Do laws apply in the traditional sense to the net?
Message-ID:
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 14:26:14 GMT
[A repost - Carl]
From caf-talk Caf Nov 15 09:38:30 1992
Newsgroups: alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.d,news.admin.policy,alt.sex,alt.sex.bondage
Subject: Re: Do laws apply in the traditional sense to the net?
Message-ID: <3995@ecicrl.ocunix.on.ca>
Date: 15 Nov 92 06:24:51 GMT
In article kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
>hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M. Hartman) writes:
>>I believe in the recent Canadian flap the consensus was that the Canadian
>>site receiveing the feed from the US site had the responsibility to
>>refuse to carry topics that would be illegal in Canada.
>[...]
>There is no such consensus.
>Canada, being a free country of sovereign people, has no topics that
>are illegal. At worst, some forms of expression on some topics are
>prohibited.
The first sentence is misleading. It is absolutely clear, that in the
case of trans-border information flow, that the sites have only to answer
to their own laws, not the laws of the other. Thus if a site in country
A sends something to a site in country B, and that something is illegal
in country B, only the site in country B has to answer to the laws in
country B. Even if that something is illegal in country A too, the site
in country A, while it has technically also violated the laws of country B,
is NOT under the jurisdiction of country B and cannot be charged
or arrested by country B. Unless country B wishes to violate the
sovereignity of country A and break international law.
The only time that the site in country A is in legal difficulty is
if the material is also illegal in country A, OR if country A has
somehow passed laws making export of such material illegal. In which
case the site is subject ONLY to the laws of country A.
Consensus is irrelevant. This is what international law and extradition
treaties are all about.
Thus, a Canadian site receiving material across the border is therefore
responsible for what comes in, though, policy (ie: library codes) may
mean that they are not legally liable.
--
Chris Lewis; clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca; Phone: Canada 613 832-0541
Psroff 3.0 info: psroff-request@ferret.ocunix.on.ca
Ferret list: ferret-request@ferret.ocunix.on.ca
--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
From caf-talk Caf Nov 15 11:45:28 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,comp.admin.policy
From: mgflax@ernie.Princeton.EDU (Marshall G. Flax)
Subject: Re: Preventing Sexual Harassment?
Message-ID: <1992Nov15.164326.13850@Princeton.EDU>
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 16:43:26 GMT
In article jaw@owlnet.rice.edu (Joseph A. Watters) writes:
>These included the _quid pro quo_ ("If you have sex with
>me I will give you a job, promote you, etc," or conversely, "if you
>don't have sex with me, you're fired") activites which are
>specifically prohibited by the sexual harassment law.
Sorry, but that's actually the _inverse_, not the _converse_. We now
return to our regularly scheduled debate.
marshall
--
=========== 5 Joyce Lane, Woodbury, NY 11797, 516-364-9331,9379 ===========
============= c/o Christine Faltz, Hofstra U., 516-463-2720 ===============
====== PGP 2.0 Public Key available by finger or request ======
= Original material(c) 1992, Marshall Flax =
From caf-talk Caf Nov 15 18:56:48 1992
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,soc.libraries.talk,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,alt.sex,rec.arts.books
From: torsten@cwis.unomaha.edu (Torsten Wesley Adair)
Subject: Re: [UPI] Library attacked for buying Madonna's Sex book
Message-ID: <1992Nov15.233623.27404@news.unomaha.edu>
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 23:36:23 GMT
The Omaha Public Library has not ordered this book.
The Acting Director of the Public Library, quoting the library's
selection policy (AKA bullet-proof jacket), has said that the library
has not ordered any copies because it has gotten bad reviews, has a poor
binding, etc.
However, this has not kept six of seven City Council memebrs from
passing a letter asking (?) the library not to purchase the book. Steve Exon
(he is responsible for the 2 Live Crew raid last Spring) is a city council
member.
No one has donated a copy yet, and even so, the library is not
required to catalog donations; gifts may end up at the book sale.
Books are cataloged as Reference for two reasons:
1) They contain information that is important and which should stay
in the library so that patrons can be served better.
2) The book is a very likely candidate to be stolen, replacing it
would be prohibative, or it conatains material that is adult in nature and
which some people would check out just to keep it from others. "Sex" falls
under this catagory.
Torsten Adair, Student Assistant, Cataloging Department, Omaha PL
These opinions are my own, and are in the public domain. As a student
assistant, I have no authority whatsoever, and anyone who believes I speak
for OPL should be locked in a padded cell.
torsten@cwis.unomaha.edu
From caf-talk Caf Nov 15 23:01:28 1992
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,soc.libraries.talk,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,alt.sex,rec.arts.books
From: nagle@netcom.com (John Nagle)
Subject: Re: [UPI] Library attacked for buying Madonna's Sex book
Message-ID: <1992Nov16.033615.7184@netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 03:36:15 GMT
sean@cobra.dra.com writes:
>The St. Louis County Public Library (independent from the city) had decided
>not to order the book either. The county library gave several reasons for
>not ordering the book. 1. It had received poor reviews. 2. It was spiral
>bound (doesn't hold up well). 3. Didn't appear to have "lasting value." and
>4. Too expensive.
Yeah, for $50 it ought to be better bound. I expect a paperback
version once hardback sales run down.
John Nagle
