From caf-talk Caf Nov 16 00:23:43 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: barnhart@ddsw1.mcs.com (Mr. Aaron Barnhart)
Subject: Re: [clari] Dole, Nunn urge Clinton to go slow lifting ban on gays
Message-ID:
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 04:14:25 GMT
kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) wrote:
:[A repost - Carl]
:
:From: clarinews@clarinet.com (UPI)
:Newsgroups: clari.news.gov.usa,clari.news.military,clari.news.group.gays,clari.local.new_york,clari.news.top
:Subject: Dole, Nunn urge Clinton to go slow lifting ban on gays
:Message-ID:
:Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 10:52:49 PST
:
: WASHINGTON (UPI) -- Senate Republican leader Robert Dole, warning that
:Congress might not support the move, urged President-elect Bill Clinton
:Sunday to go slow in lifting the ban on gays in the military. [...]
: If the policy is changed ``overnight,'' Nunn said, ``I fear for the
:lives of people in the military themselves. I think there could be some
:very emotional feelings, so I would prefer that it be stretched out over
:a period of time.''
My first reaction to this was, "It figures, Bob Dole," but then I dug
up this article by sociologist Charlie Moskos, reprinted w/o permission
from the New Republic, 8/5/1991. It's about the Army's success in
healing another sensitive blind spot in our country's vision of
equality.
"... The Army's stated goal is absolute commitment to equal opportunity
and non-discrimination regardless of race -- with no qualifications. This
principle is no longer debated at any level in the military. By contrast,
equal opportunity for women is also a stated principle, but the role of
women continues to be a roiling source of contention.
"An important symbol of the Army's emphasis on non-discrimination is found
in the officer evaluation report. Among the 14 categories in the
evaluation, one states: 'supports equal opportunity.' Normally these
reports are completed by the immediate supervisor and reviewd by the
next highest person in the chain of command. A similar evaluation system
operates for sergeants. Anything less than a favorable rating in this
category means the end of one's military career." ...
"A soldier being harassed by a sergeant of the same race soon abandons
notions that common racial origin overrides all, especially when his
misery is being shared by a person of another race. The social barriers
in the Army lie not so much between whites and blacks as between lower-
ranking soldiers and sergeants, and between enlisted persons and
officers." ...
"In the late '70s an extraordinary 12 to 14 hours were devoted to race
relations in basic training, with followup throughout the soldier's
term of service. NCOs as well as recruits were required to take race
relations training. many white soldiers resented these courses,
considering them exercises in white guilt. But studies showed the
courses did make whites more attuned to black feelings once the
accusatory tone of the earlier courses was replaced by a 'how do
we solve this problem?' approach [of the role playing sessions].
... As a sign of the times, the emphasis has shifted toward sexual
harassment issues."
Best of luck, army.
Aaron
From caf-talk Caf Nov 16 09:17:11 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [alt.dreams] McElwaine's postings (was Re: THE DIVINE MASTERS, and Dreams)
Message-ID: <1992Nov16.141703.12767@eff.org>
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 14:17:03 GMT
[A repost - Carl]
From caf-talk Caf Nov 16 09:17:11 1992
Subject: McElwaine's postings (was Re: THE DIVINE MASTERS, and Dreams)
Message-ID: <1992Nov6.065819.22603@gnosys.svle.ma.us>
From: gst@gnosys.svle.ma.us (Gary S. Trujillo)
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 06:58:19 GMT
In <1992Nov4.171804.2100@cnsvax.uwec.edu> mcelwre@cnsvax.uwec.edu writes:
> DREAMS are a very important part of the teachings and practices of
> Eckankar (referred to in the following article), but NOT of Sant Mat (also
> mentioned below)...
The following message is informational only. There is no necessary
endorsement of its content or any recommendation to act in any par-
ticular manner. In fact, I tend to feel that, whatever we might feel
about the content of Robert's articles, he has as much right as anyone
to post them, and I see the following attempt to prevent him from doing
so to be a bit scary, at least in the Usenet context.
That all having been said, I wish Robert McElwaine would make some attempt
to enter into a discussion, rather than just posting tracts. It would be
far more useful, I think, if he were to attempt to respond to what is being
talked about in this newsgroup from the perspective of what he knows about
Eckankar, rather than just throwing out canned prefabricated materials.
Gary
> Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 13:41:00 CST
> From: Dan Drumm
> Sender: Law School Discussion List
> To: Multiple recipients of list LAWSCH-L
> Reply-To: Law School Discussion List
> Message-Id: <9210161846.AA20938@unix1.CS.UMASS.EDU>
>
> I would like to acknowledge receipt of your recent
> complaint concerning materials that your Notes, Conference,
> or Bulletin Board received from Mr. Robert McElwaine, one of
> our students here at the University of Wisconsin - Eau
> Claire.
> Mr. McElwaine's activities on the Internet closely
> parallel similar activities here on campus in which he has
> used every available public forum to promote his views.
> Attempts to limit these activities have met with determined
> and protracted resistance and litigation on his part based
> upon his First Amendment rights under the United States
> Constitution. He contends that the readers of Conferences
> or Bulletin Boards have no right to infringe on his right of
> free expression. However, he does acknowledge and accept
> that the owners, moderators, or managers of Notes,
> Conferences, or Bulletin Boards do have the right to remove
> such material and to request that he not post any other
> materials. He has given assurances that upon receipt of
> such a request that he will cease his activities.
> The fastest way to take care of the issue and to
> prevent your Notes, Conference, or Bulletin Board from being
> the recipient of additional communications from Mr.
> McElwaine is to send him Email and request that he stop.
> That Email should give your name and the name of the
> Bulletin Board, Notes, or Conference you moderate or
> control. You should specifically state that you have the
> authority to request that he cease and desist from any
> further postings. If you are not the administrator, then
> you should forward this message to the individual who has
> such authority and request that he/she contact Mr.
> McElwaine.
> I would request that a copy of any correspondence with
> Mr. McElwaine be also sent to me at CBRENNER@UWEC.EDU. If,
> after being requested to stop, he continues to send his
> materials The University of Wisconsin - Eau Claire will take
> steps revoke his Internet privileges.
> On behalf of the University of Wisconsin - Eau Claire I
> would like to apologize for any inconvenience Mr. McElwaine
> has caused and to thank you for helping us address the
> problem.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Charles J. Brenner, Director
> Computing and Networking Services
--
Gary S. Trujillo gst@gnosys.svle.ma.us
Somerville, Massachusetts {wjh12,bu.edu,spdcc,ima,cdp}!gnosys!gst
--
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent EFF; this is just me.
=kadie@eff.org, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
From caf-talk Caf Nov 16 09:17:40 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [alt.dreams] Re: McElwaine's postings (was Re: THE DIVINE MASTERS, and Dreams)
Message-ID: <1992Nov16.141707.12807@eff.org>
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 14:17:07 GMT
[A repost - Carl]
From caf-talk Caf Nov 16 09:17:40 1992
From: entpph@ritvax.isc.rit.edu
Subject: Re: McElwaine's postings (was Re: THE DIVINE MASTERS, and Dreams)
Message-ID: <1992Nov6.150400.18701@ultb.isc.rit.edu>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 15:04:00 GMT
Many thanks to Gary Trujillo for bringing to light attempts to muzzle
Robert McElwaine. McElwaine's beliefs couldn't be farther from my own,
but attempts to deprive him of his rights by revoking his "privleges"
are unacceptable.
I wonder if McElwaine would be experiencing the same difficulties if
the content of his messages were in praise of the Reublican Party or
the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals?
I suggest we all send Robert McElwaine a message of support at
mcelwre@cnsvax.uwec.edu, and a message of protest about his
treatment to Charles Brenner (data systems manager?) at
cbrenner@uwec.edu.
I know it's a cliche, but if we allow them to silence McElwaine, it's
me they'll silence next and you after me.
Erik Timmerman
Film/Video Department
RIT
--
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent EFF; this is just me.
=kadie@eff.org, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
From caf-talk Caf Nov 16 11:11:21 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,alt.dreams
From: kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: Re: [alt.dreams] McElwaine's postings (was Re: THE DIVINE MASTERS, and Dreams)
Message-ID: <1992Nov16.161114.15845@eff.org>
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 16:11:14 GMT
Charles J. Brenner, Director Computing and Networking Services writes:
[...]
> I would request that a copy of any correspondence with
> Mr. McElwaine be also sent to me at CBRENNER@UWEC.EDU. If,
> after being requested to stop, he continues to send his
> materials The University of Wisconsin - Eau Claire will take
> steps revoke his Internet privileges.
[...]
I assume that such steps would respect Mr. McElwaine's due process
rights. But I worry, since explusion from a communications medium is
not a typical univeristy sanction. (Typical sanctions include things
like informal warnings, formal warnings, university suspensions.)
I note that labeling Internet access a "privilege" does not remove
due process requirements.
- Carl
ANNOTATED REFERENCES
(All these documents are available on-line. Access information follows.)
=================
faq/due-process
=================
* Due Process
q: Should users be suspended from the computer pending formal discipline?
a: No, with one exception. Just as students should not be expelled from
...
=================
=================
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/faq/due-process
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/faq due-process
--
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent EFF; this is just me.
=kadie@eff.org, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
From caf-talk Caf Nov 16 11:49:58 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [eff.mail.cwis-l] Re: CWIS Policies, Procedures, Guidelines, etc.
Message-ID: <1992Nov16.164951.16742@eff.org>
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 16:49:51 GMT
[A repost - Carl]
From caf-talk Caf Nov 16 11:49:58 1992
From: d_tindall@LUKE.SPU.EDU (Dave Tindall - Seattle Pacific University)
Subject: Re: CWIS Policies, Procedures, Guidelines, etc.
Message-ID: <199211161533.AA14121@eff.org>
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 15:29:26 GMT
>
> I would like to receive any copies of CWIS policies as well and have
> written to several schools for copies. If there are any available that
> can be FTP'd I would like to know....Thank You.
>
> Kim Granquist (kgranqu3@ua1vm.ua.edu)
Excuse the message I just sent...without these valuable comments...
The NSF had a project to collect information on policies and procedures from
many academic institutions. I received a list of 70-80 "policy and procedure"
documents that institutions have submitted to that project within the last
week or so.
anonymous ftp to nnsc.nsf.net
cd to "policies-procedures"
the policy-procedure documents are listed by organization
>===============================================================<
: David W. Tindall SSSS :
: Executive Director S PPPP :
: Seattle Pacific University SSSS P P U U :
: Computer & Information Systems S PPPP U U :
: INTERNET: d_tindall@luke.spu.edu SSSS P U U :
: PHONE & VOICE MAIL: (206)281-2239 P U U :
: FAX: (206)281-2850 UUUU :
>===============================================================<
--
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent EFF; this is just me.
=kadie@eff.org, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
From caf-talk Caf Nov 16 13:59:50 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,comp.admin.policy
From: kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: Public & Corporate Librarian Ethics Codes
Message-ID: <1992Nov16.185943.18940@eff.org>
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 18:59:43 GMT
Here are two professional societies' ethics codes.
The first is the American Library Association's (ALA) "The Librarian's
Code of Ethics". The ALA is the main professional society for "public"
librarians. The second is the American Society for Information
Science's (ASIS) "A Code of Ethics for Information Scientists". The
ASIS is the main professional society for "corporate librarians".
I find it interesting that the codes implicitly distinish between
"public" and "private" librarians. As sys admin's professionalize, I
think there will be a similar need to distinish between "public" and
"private" sys admins. Moreover, with the change of a few words, I
think each code could apply to a type of sys admin.
- Carl
============= ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/library/ethics.ala ===========
[From _Intellectual Freedom Manual 3d ed. (Chicago: American Library
Association, 1989).]
The Librarian's Code of Ethics
I. Librarians must provide the highest level of service through
appropriate and usefully organized collections, fair and
equitable circulation and service policies, and skillful,
accurate, unbiased, and courteous responses to all requests for
assistance.
II. Librarians must resist all efforts by groups or individuals to censor
library material.
III. Librarians must protect each user's right to privacy with respect to
information sought or received and materials consulted, borrowed,
or acquired.
IV. Librarians must adhere to the principles of due process and
equality of opportunity in peer relationships and personal
actions.
V. Librarians must distinguish clearly in their actions and
statements between their personal philosophies and attitudes and
those of an institution or professional body.
VI. Librarians must avoid situations in which personal interests might be
served or financial benefits gained at the expense of library
users, colleagues, or the employing institution.
============= ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/library/ethics.asis ===========
[From _Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science (August/
September 1990): 25]
A Code of Ethics for Information Scientists:
Responsibility to Individual Persons
Information professionals should:
* strive to make information available to individuals who need it
* strive both to ensure accuracy and not to infringe upon privacy or
confidentiality in providing information about individuals
* protect each information user's and provider's right to privacy
and confidentiality
* respect an information provider's proprietary rights
Responsibility to Society
Information professionals should:
* serve the legitimate information needs of a large and complex society
while at the same time being mindful of individuals' rights
* resist efforts to censor publications
* play active roles in educating society to understand and
appreciate the importance of information promoting equal
opportunity for access to information
==============================================================================
--
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent EFF; this is just me.
=kadie@eff.org, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
From caf-talk Caf Nov 16 14:57:36 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,alt.dreams
From: morgan@ms.uky.edu (Wes Morgan)
Subject: Re: [alt.dreams] Re: McElwaine's postings (was Re: THE DIVINE
Message-ID: <1992Nov16.144854.9296@ms.uky.edu>
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 19:48:54 GMT
>Newsgroups: alt.dreams
>From: entpph@ritvax.isc.rit.edu
>Subject: Re: McElwaine's postings (was Re: THE DIVINE MASTERS, and Dreams)
>
>Many thanks to Gary Trujillo for bringing to light attempts to muzzle
>Robert McElwaine. McElwaine's beliefs couldn't be farther from my own,
>but attempts to deprive him of his rights by revoking his "privleges"
>are unacceptable.
Um, his privileges aren't being revoked yet; see my comments below.
>I wonder if McElwaine would be experiencing the same difficulties if
>the content of his messages were in praise of the Reublican Party or
>the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals?
I think so; again, see my later comments for details.
>I suggest we all send Robert McElwaine a message of support at
>mcelwre@cnsvax.uwec.edu, and a message of protest about his
>treatment to Charles Brenner (data systems manager?) at
>cbrenner@uwec.edu.
I suggest that we take a step back and look at the entire picture.
Mr. McElwaine has been sending materials to several (many?) electronic
mailing lists and bulletin boards. These materials seem to have little
in common with the ongoing discussions on those lists/boards/groups. I
would suggest that the mere existence of a mailing list does NOT imply
that it may be used as a forum for unlimited free expression.
[ I run a mailing list for StarServer owners/admins; I don't want to see ]
[ traffic that deals with far-removed subjects. It's a pain, and it de- ]
[ tracts from the direction of the list. ]
The owners/operators/moderators of those lists have the ability to ensure
that their forum remains "on topic"; this capability is part of the "limited
public forum" doctrine endorsed by the Supreme Court. Therefore, it is pro-
per for these owners/operators/moderators to request that such "off topic"
activies cease.
Assuming that these requests were, in fact, made and that they were, in
fact, ignored, a complaint to the appropriate administrator would be proper.
The owners/operators/moderators of a mailing list or bulletin board have an
obligation to their subscribers.
[ Again, I would make similar complaints if someone flooded my mailing list ]
[ with, say, Clinton-Gore OR Bush-Quayle political hoohah. My subscribers ]
[ are interested in StarServer information, not political crud; they have ]
[ any number of fora which provide that information. ]
I noticed one very important thing in the included message. Apparently,
no action will be taken against this fellow UNLESS he ignores a request
to cease such activity. I consider that a fair compromise.
--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
From caf-talk Caf Nov 16 17:30:29 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 02.53
Message-ID: <1992Nov16.223019.23076@eff.org>
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 22:30:19 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/cafv02n53".
The full CAF-News is also available via email. Send email to
archive-server@eff.org. Include the line:
send caf-news cafv02n53
--- begin abstract ---
[Week ending November 1, 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.
===============================================================
[This week's guest editor is Jared Danziger,
cjzw7l31@stimpy.ir.miami.edu - Carl]
Notes 1-2 are about Canada.
1. At least seven newsgroups from the alt.sex news hierarchy remain
banned at Wilfred Laurier University. The ban originated in the
actions of Hart Benzer, Director of Computer Services, who personally
considered the material in the newsgroups offensive. A concurring
opinion from other university administrators resulted in the ban of
these newsgroups. The newsgroups remain banned at least until a
committee on computers meets. Similar bans have occurred at other
universities throughout Canada.
<9210261909.AA25226@herodotus.cs.uiuc.edu>
2. Amendments to the Canadian Constitution concerning Language Minority
Rights are empty guarantees due to escape clauses within the constitution.
In addition, the guidelines established by the amendments are impractical
and do not provide extensive enough coverage.
<199210262224.AA15552@eff.org>
Note 3 is about harassment.
3. "The computers in these cases are the means or tools by which harassment
takes place, they are not the harasser ('Computers don't harass people,
people harass people'). A person can be harassed by someone who sends them
unwelcome, sexually oriented hand-written or typed letters. Yet we don't
even consider banning paper correspondence... The law implies that
you should do your best to reduce the probability of harassment... The
only reasonable 'preventive' measure that an employer or school can
take with sexual harassment is to educate the employees or students about
sexual harassment, give examples of most likely unwelcome behavior, and
explain the possible consequences."
Notes 4-7 are nominations for best policy in various categories. These
policies are merely nominations, they may contain various flaws and may
not be well suited for many computing facilities. They are useful models
for the construction or revision of institutional policies.
4. Prohibitions: The EFF in house rules allow a broad range of
actions. Major points include:
"2. No use of this or any other EFF system as a staging ground
to crack other systems...
4. No use of this or any other EFF system for illegal or criminal
purposes.
9. Obstructing [other people's] work by consuming gratuitously
large amounts of system resources (disk space, CPU time) or by
deliberately crashing the machine(s) will not be tolerated....
11.Attempts to read another person's electronic mail or other protected
files will be treated with the utmost seriousness"
<1992Oct29.200346.5545@eff.org>
5. Netnews: "That the same standards and principles of intellectual
and academic freedom developed for university libraries be applied to
material received from the news network... That the same standards of
intellectual and academic freedom developed for faculty and student
publication in traditional media be applied to publication in computer
media."
<1992Oct29.200825.5648@eff.org>
6. Due Process: "Violations of the University Code of Computer Ethics
are treated like any other ethical violation as outlined in the
Student Handbook and applicable faculty and staff handbooks.
Violators may also be billed for illegal use of the computer systems
and may be prosecuted for statutory violations..."
<1992Oct29.201759.5761@eff.org>
7. Participation: "As constituents of the academic community, students
should be free, individually and collectively, to express their views
on issues of institutional policy and on matters of general interest
to the student body. The student body should have clearly defined
means to participate in the formulation and application of
institutional policy affecting academic and student affairs... the
actions of the student government within the areas of its jurisdiction
should be reviewed only through orderly prescribed procedures."
<1992Oct29.202705.5949@eff.org>
Notes 8-9 discuss how the Hatch Act affects federal employees and private
individuals and corporations who receive money from the federal government.
8. "The Hatch act applies only to federal civil service employees, not to
grantees and certainly not to students. I believe the State's "little
Hatch Acts" have similar scope. Moreover, the Hatch Act doesn't forbid all
political activity by covered employees."
<1992Oct30.192931.20021@eff.org>
9. "The Hatch act does not forbid Federal employees from engaging in
politics or from expressing political opinions. It forbids them from
certain official roles in partisan political campaigns, or for
collecting donations from political campaigns, and other than a couple
of little details, that is pretty much it. ...Federal employees still
have First Amendment rights"
<1cs5g4INN76p@agate.berkeley.edu>
- Jared Danziger]
--- 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 16 19:38:13 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,alt.society.civil-liberty,misc.legal
From: greeny@eff.org (J S Greenfield)
Subject: CAF Archive Recent Changes -- cases/civics/civil-liberty/law (long)
Message-ID: <1992Nov17.003805.25624@eff.org>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 00:38:05 GMT
Hi. I'm the new co-archivist (with Carl Kadie) for the CAF (Computer
and Academic Freedom) Archive. I'm posting the recent changes to
the archive (since early September) in four parts, since the whole
file is very large (about 60K).
The entire file can be retrieved via gopher, anonymous ftp, or email
(as described below) from the main directory (pub/academic/recent-changes).
Jonathan
------------------------------------------------------
Recent Changes to the
* Computers and Academic Freedom (CAF) Archive
-- cases, civics, civil-liberty and law
The CAF Archive is an electronic library of information about
computers and academic freedom.
If you have gopher, the archive is browsable with the command:
gopher -p academic/law gopher.eff.org
It is available via anonymous ftp to ftp.eff.org (192.88.144.4) in
directory "pub/academic". It is also available via email. For
information on email access send email to archive-server@eff.org. In
the body of your note include the lines "help" and "index".
For more information, to make contributions, or to report typos
contact J.S. Greenfield (greeny@eff.org).
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/cases/wlu.ca
=================
* WLU -- Ca
An article from Wilfrid Laurier University's student newspaper, the
Cord, about the removal of the alt.sex newsgroups because the
adminstration finds them "offensive" and "puerile".
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/civics/canada.constitution
=================
* The Constitution of Canada
The full text of the Canadian Constitution (consolidated with amendments).
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/civics/canada.meech-accord
=================
* The Canadian Meech Lake Accord (1987)
The full text of the 1987 Meech Lake Accord, a rejected amendement to
the Canadian Constitution.
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/civics/federalist-paper-10
=================
* Federalist Paper #10
The full text of Federalist Paper #10 (November 23, 1787).
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/civics/federalist-paper-51
=================
* Federalist Paper #51
The full text of Federalist Paper #51 (February 8, 1788).
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/civics/federalist-papers.pointer
=================
* Pointer to the Federalist Papers
Information on how to get the Federalist Papers via anonymous ftp.
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/civics/senator.fax-numbers
=================
* Fax numbers for US Senators
A recent listing of fax numbers for all US Senators (September 1992).
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/civics/virginia.decl-of-rights
=================
* Virginia's Declaration of Rights
The full text of Virginia's Declaration of Rights (June 12, 1776).
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/civil-liberty/aclu.aclu
=================
* Guardian of Liberty: American Civil Liberties Union -- ACLU Briefing Paper #1
Contents:
The ACLU Mandate
What rights are guaranteed in the Bill of Rights?
A Brief History
How the ACLU Chooses Its Cases
How the ACLU Works
The Financial Picture
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/civil-liberty/aclu.history
=================
* A History of the ACLU -- Ira Glasser Speech
A transcript of a speech by Ira Glasser (ACLU national director, at the time),
before the National Press Club, Washington, DC. on October 6, 1988. The speech
details the history of the ACLU and its work.
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/civil-liberty/aids.aclu
=================
* AIDS and Civil-Liberties -- ACLU Briefing Paper #13
Answers these questions:
What is "HIV" and what is "AIDS"?
What are the facts about how HIV spreads?
Can HIV disease be cured?
Doesn't HIV mainly afflict gay men and drug addicts?
To stop the spread of HIV, shouldn't the government require all citizens
to be tested?
But why shouldn't the government provide lists of people who test positive
for HIV?
Does the law protect the rights of people with HIV disease?
How do these anti-discrimination laws work?
But shouldn't employers be able to fire people with HIV disease?
Don't HIV-infected health care workers pose enough of a risk to their
patients to be prohibited from working?
Shouldn't school children with HIV disease be kept home?
Have the courts enforced these principles in cases involving
discrimination against people with HIV disease?
Wouldn't the distribution of clean needles and condoms promote drug use
and promiscuity?
Should laws be enacted to punish those who deliberately try to spread HIV
disease?
Should suspected or convicted rapists be forced to take HIV tests?
Shouldn't the government censor education about HIV on the ground that
it's obscene?
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/civil-liberty/artistic-freedom.aclu
=================
* Artistic Freedom -- ACLU Briefing Paper #14
Answers these questions:
What protects the work of artists from government censorship?
When and how did the threat to artistic freedom emerge in this country?
How has the Supreme Court dealt with sexually explicit expression?
Why does the ACLU object to the obscenity exception to the First Amendment?
But don't obscene and pornographic works cause anti-social and even
violent behavior?
Even if the government can't suppress art, surely it shouldn't use
tax monies to fund art that offends!?
Why does the ACLU object to movie ratings, music labeling, or other
voluntary rating systems? Don't they give guidance to consumers,
especially parents?
But mustn't we protect our children from inappropriate messages and
images, especially graphic sex and violence?
Defending artists is fine, but why does the ACLU spend time and money
defending pornographers and sleaze merchants?
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/civil-liberty/bill-of-rights.history.aclu
=================
* A History of the Bill of Rights -- ACLU Briefing Paper #9
Contents:
The Origins Of Liberty
The Constitutional Convention
Ratification Of The Constitution
The First Congress
Ratification Of The Bill Of Rights
Rights Declared, But Justice Denied
The Fourth Branch
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/civil-liberty/campaign-92.aclu
=================
* Campaign for the Bill of Rights '92 -- ACLU
The American Civil Liberties Union's planks for its "Campaign for the
Bill of Rights '92". The planks are 1) a national campaign against
bigotry and racism, 2) constitutional protection for a woman's right
to choose, 3) a realistic approach to crime and punishment, 4) a Bill
of Rights for all working people.
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/civil-liberty/censorship.survey
=================
* Censorship of Books at Public Schools -- Survey Results
This article summarizes the findings of the tenth annual survey on book
censorship in public schools, conducted by the People for the American
Way. The survey found the number of challenges (and successful challenges)
of books to be at a ten-year high.
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/civil-liberty/church-and-state.aclu
=================
* Church and State -- ACLU Briefing Paper #3
Answers these questions:
Were people free to practice their religious beliefs in colonial times?
Does the phrase "separation of church and state" actually appear in
the constitution?
Our nation was founded by religious individuals, and some
manifestations of the religious aspects of our history and culture are
inevitable. So what does separation mean exactly?
Is prayer in public schools constitutional if it is optional?
Can children pray in school at all?
Why can't schools be required by law to teach the biblical theory of
the earth's origins-- "creationism"--in addition to teaching evolution?
If students can meet on school grounds in extra-curricular political
or social groups, can't they also meet in religious groups?
Since religious day schools are educating the children of taxpayers,
can't the government assist those schools?
Religious facilities sometimes house services like daycare and foster
care for the general public. Is it constitutional for those programs
to receive government funds?
Why does the ACLU oppose religious displays on public property during
the Christmas season?
If the government cannot be involved with religion, does that mean the
clergy cannot speak out on political issues?
Should the Catholic Church lose its tax exempt status because its
officials are involved in lobbying against abortion and birth control?
Are members of religious "cults" also protected by the Establishment Clause?
Can individuals whose religious beliefs conflict with certain laws
receive special consideration from government?
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/civil-liberty/crime.aclu
=================
* Crime and Civil Liberties -- ACLU Briefing Paper #2
Answers these questions:
Why should criminals enjoy special rights at the expense of the rest of us?
Aren't constitutional technicalities like the Miranda warnings and the
exclusionary rule responsible for letting violent criminals go free?
Shouldn't criminal defendants be locked up before trial so they won't
commit more crimes while free on bail?
Instead of being soft on criminals, shouldn't judges impose stiffer
sentences so that people will think twice before committing a crime?
If the sentence is death, even a hardened criminal might not want to
take chances--so shouldn't we execute more people to deter would-be
murderers?
What about the victims of crime -- don't they have rights too?
What can be done about crime that doesn't violate our constitutional rights?
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/civil-liberty/drug-testing.workplace.aclu
=================
* Drug Testing in the Workplace -- ACLU Briefing Paper #5
Answers these questions:
Don't employers have the right to expect their employees not to be
high on drugs on the job?
Can urine tests determine precisely when a particular drug was used?
If you don't use drugs, you have nothing to hide--so why object to testing?
Are drug tests reliable?
Still, isn't universal testing the best way to catch drug users?
But shouldn't exceptions be made for certain workers, such as airline
pilots, who are responsible for the lives of others?
Drug use costs industry millions in lost worker productivity each
year. Don't employers have a right to test as a way of protecting
their investment?
Have any courts ruled that mandatory urine testing of government
employees is a violation of the constitution?
If the constitution can't help them, how can private employees protect
themselves against drug testing?
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/civil-liberty/english-only.aclu
=================
* "English Only" -- ACLU Briefing Paper #6
Answers these questions:
What is an "English Only" law?
Where have such laws been enacted?
What are the consequences of "English Only" laws?
Do "English Only" laws affect only government services and programs?
Who is affected by "English Only" laws?
How do "English Only" laws deprive people of their rights?
What kinds of language policies were adopted with regard to past
generations of immigrants?
Why are bilingual ballots needed since citizenship is required to
vote, English literacy is required for citizenship, and political
campaigns are largely conducted in English?
Doesn't bilingual education slow immigrant children's learning of
English, in contrast to the "sink or swim" method used in the past?
But won't "English Only" laws speed up the assimilation of today's
immigrants into our society and prevent their isolation?
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/civil-liberty/freedom-of-expression.aclu
=================
* Freedom of Expression -- ACLU Briefing Paper #10
Answers these questions:
What were the philosophical underpinnings of the First Amendment's guarantees?
Why does freedom of expression play such a critical role in our
constitutional system?
What was the early history of the First Amendment and freedom of expression?
How did the courts respond to First Amendment violations?
What forms of expression are protected by the First Amendment?
Can speech be curtailed if it is thought to jeopardize national security?
Why should racists and other hatemongers, or those espousing
anti-democratic political doctrines, have free speech rights?
Can free speech be limited in any way?
Are any forms of expression not protected by the First Amendment?
Is freedom of expression in danger today?
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/civil-liberty/freedom.essay
=================
* Essay on the Freedoms Protected by the Bill of Rights
An essay by Richard Criley of the Bill of Rights Foundation, examining the
security of freedom in the United States. The essay discusses systematic
abuses of freedom that occurred during the last half-century.
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/civil-liberty/human-rights.un
=================
* Universal Declaration of Human Rights -- United Nations
The full text of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by
the General Assembly of the United Nations on December 10, 1948.
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/civil-liberty/pledge.history
=================
* A History of the Pledge of Allegiance
An essay examining the origins of the Pledge of Allegiance and the history
of its introduction into public schools, written by John W. Baer of
Propaganda Review.
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/civil-liberty/reproductive-freedom.minors.aclu
=================
* Reproductive Freedom: The Rights of Minors -- ACLU Briefing Paper #7
Answers these questions:
How many states have passed laws that restrict teenagers' access to abortion?
How do these laws work?
What's the difference between a consent and a notification law?
What's wrong with parental notification or consent laws?
Whatever parents' reactions might be, it's _their_ daughter--so don't
they have the right to be involved?
What types of family situations lead teenagers to seek a confidential abortion?
Can a teenager, suddenly faced with the choice between childbirth and
abortion, really make a responsible decision?
Don't laws restricting abortion also contain alternatives for mature
minors or those who fear parental reprisals?
Aren't legal delays justified when a teenager might risk physical and
emotional harm by having an abortion?
What are the consequences, besides increased health risks, of
restricting teens' access to abortion?
Do restrictions on minors affect the reproductive choices of other women?
What can be done to provide genuine help for teenagers and, thus,
reduce their need for abortion?
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/civil-liberty/top.art.censors.1992
=================
* Top Art Censors of 1992
An article reporting the ACLU's list of the "1992 Arts Censors of
the Year." The list cites governmental officials and private
individuals, including:
Anne-Imelda Radice (chair of the NEA),
Oliver North,
Catharine MacKinnon and Andrea Dworkin,
and The Rev. Donald Wildmon, head of the American Family Association.
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/civil-liberty/womens-rights.1848
=================
* Declaration of Sentiments from 1st Women's Rights Convention
in the United States, held in Seneca Falls, New York, the nineteenth
and twentieth of July, 1848. Among the famous who signed are Elizabeth
Cady Stanton, whose home in Seneca Falls is now part of the Women's
Rights National Park, and Frederick Douglass.
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/law/chaplinsky-v-new-hampshire
=================
* Expression -- Fighting Words -- Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire
An excerpt from UWM Post v. U. of Wisconsin outlining the fighting words
doctrine established by Chaplinsky and later cases. In part, it states
that the modern fighting words doctrine allows regulation of words which
"by their very utterance...tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace"
and are "directed at the person of the hearer."
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/law/charter.can
=================
* Constitution -- Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms -- Full Text
From the Canadian Constitution Act 1982
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/law/cohen-v-california.1
=================
* Expression -- Offensive -- Cohen v. California -- 1
Definition of "fighting words"; why no right not to be offended
The definition of fighting words from _Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire_
and then _Cohen v. California_. Also, says quotes the Supreme Court
saying that there is no universal right to not hear offensive
expression.
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/law/cohen-v-california.3
=================
* Expression -- Offensive -- Cohen v. California -- 3
Here are excerpts from several Supreme Court decisions inclusing
_Cohen v. Calfiornia_. They say that offensive public expression is
protected if those offended can "effectively avoid further bombardment
of their sensibilities simply by averting their eyes."
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/law/copyright.act.pointer
=================
* Copyright -- U.S. Law -- Full text -- Pointer
If you have access to gopher, you can access the text of the U.S.
Copyright Act.
gopher fatty.law.cornell.edu
--> 9. Legal Information Institute/
--> 1. Copyright Act/
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/law/cornelius-v-naacp
=================
* Expression -- Restrictions w. Disguised Purpose -- Cornelius v. NAACP
In Cornelius v. NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund (1985), the SC
ruled "The existence of reasonable grounds for limiting access to a
nonpublic forum, however, will not save a regulation that is in
reality a facade for viewpoint-based discrimination..."
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/law/ferpa
=================
* Privacy -- School Records -- FERPA -- Excerpts
Excerpts from _College and University Student Records: A Legal
Compendium_, Edited by Joan E. Van Tol, 1989. Details the Family
Education Rights and Privacy Act's (Buckley Amendment's) provisions on
directory information.
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/law/hustler-magazine-v-falwell
=================
* Expression -- Offensive -- Hustler Magazine v. Falwell
Summary from _The First Amendment Book_ by Robert J. Wagmam, p. 157.
The publisher of a cartoon parody, already found not to be libelous,
could not be punished for the emotional distress the cartoon may have
caused. The Court wrote: "in public debate our own citizens must
tolerate insulting, and even outrageous speech in order to provide
adequate breathing space to the freedoms protected by the First
Amendment."
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/law/indecency.nea
=================
* Expression -- Indecency -- NEA
A UPI story: "A federal judge declared unconstitutional Tuesday the
decency clause the National Endowment for the Arts used in determining
who receives grant money, saying it was too vague and overbroad in
restricting artists' freedom of speech."
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/law/jocobson-v-usa
=================
* Expression -- Child Porn -- Jocobson v. USA
Newspaper story saying: "The Supreme Court Monday made it more
difficult for police to pursue undercover sting operations, ruling
that a man who bought child pornography after a 2 1/2 year government
probe was entrapped."
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/law/mass-student-searches
=================
* Privacy -- Mass Students Searches
An excerpt from The ACLU Handbook: _The Rights of Students_, stating that
"there must a reasonable suspicion directed specifically at each student
before a school official can search students."
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/law/r-v-butler
=================
* Expression -- Obscenity -- Canada -- R. v. Butler
The official summary and excerpts from the full decision in the case
of _R. v. Butler_. This Canadian Supreme Court case, decided in
February 1992, redefined "obscenity" in Canada.
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/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.
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/law/young-conservatives-v-sau
=================
* Expression -- Offensive -- Young Conservatives v. SAU
A UPI story that tells how Stephen F. Austin University originally
banned a group's "sexist" flyers, but when challenged, the ban was
lifted and a cash settlement was given to the students whose
free-speech was violated by the ban.
From caf-talk Caf Nov 16 19:39:36 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: greeny@eff.org (J S Greenfield)
Subject: CAF Archive Recent Changes -- main directory/academic/admin/faq/library
Message-ID: <1992Nov17.003929.25697@eff.org>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 00:39:29 GMT
Recent Changes to the
* Computers and Academic Freedom (CAF) Archive
-- main directory, academic, admin, faq, library
The CAF Archive is an electronic library of information about
computers and academic freedom.
If you have gopher, the archive is browsable with the command:
gopher -p academic/law gopher.eff.org
It is available via anonymous ftp to ftp.eff.org (192.88.144.4) in
directory "pub/academic". It is also available via email. For
information on email access send email to archive-server@eff.org. In
the body of your note include the lines "help" and "index".
For more information, to make contributions, or to report typos
contact J.S. Greenfield (greeny@eff.org).
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/abstracts
=================
* Computers and Academic Freedom News (CAF-News) -- Abstracts
These are abstracts to the Computers and Academic Freedom News
(CAF-news). Referenced issues of CAF-news are available via anonymous
ftp to eff.org in directory "academic/news".
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/academic/academic-freedom.wus
=================
* Academic Freedom (WUS)
The Lima Declaration on Academic Freedom and Autonomy of Institutions
of Higher Education, an international declaration by the World
University Service.
Source: _World University Service Academic Freedom 1990: A Human
Rights Report_ by Laksiri Fernando, et al.
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/academic/harassment-grievances.uiuc
=================
* U. of Illinois at U-C -- Sexual Harassment Grievance Procedure
The procedure for enforcing the sexual harassment policy at the U. of
Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. The gist of the policy is that the
policy is complaint driven and aided by the grievant's supervisor or
one of several designated university officials.
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/academic/student.freedoms.aaup
=================
* Student Freedoms (AAUP)
Joint Statement on Rights and Freedoms of Students -- This is the main
U.S. statement on student academic freedom.
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/admin/banned-list-selection
=================
* Banned List -- Selection Criteria
A description of the sources and selection criteria for policies and
incidents included in the CAF-News "Banned...1992" list.
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/admin/call-for-guest-editors
=================
A call for guest editors for the Computer and Academic Freedom News.
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/admin/getting-material-on-line
=================
Tips on how to get permission from nonprofit organizations to put their
some of their material on-line.
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/anonymity
=================
* On individual privacy and the use of "handles"
This article is an excerpt from an issue of FIDONEWS on individual
privacy and the use of handles. It accepts the need of a system
operator to know the name of a user; but suggests that the use of a
handle is analogous to a request to withhold the name in a letter to
the editor. The article concludes with a set of guidelines for
preserving the right to be anonymous.
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/banned.1991
=================
* Computer material that was banned/challenged in academia in 1991
A list of computer material that was banned at universities during (or
before) 1991. It summarizes incidents and policies at Ohio State U.,
the U. of Illinois (two campuses), Case Western U., Boston U., U. of
Waterloo, U. of Toledo, Western Washington U., Iowa State U.,
Pennsylvania State U., U. of Texas, U. of Newcastle, James Madison U.,
U. of Wisconsin, and others.
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/banned.1992
=================
* Computer material that was banned/challenged in academia in 1992
A list of computer material that was banned or challenged in academia
in 1992. The institutions mentioned are:
Ball State U., Boston U. (2), Carnegie Mellon U., German universities,
Iowa State U. (3), Irish universities, James Madison U., Middle East
Technical U., North Dakota State U., Pennsylvania State U., Princeton,
Simon Fraser U., U. of British Columbia, U. of California at Berkeley
*, U. of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, U. of Manitoba, U. of
Massachusetts at Boston, U. of Nebraska at Lincoln, U. of Newcastle,
U. of Ottawa, U. of Texas, U. of Toledo, U. of Toronto *, U. of
Wyoming, United Kingdom Net, Virginia Public Education Network,
Virginia Tech, Western Washington U. (& U. of Washington), Wilfrid
Laurier U. (2), Williams College **
========
* Site of an unsuccessful challenge
** College not directly involved.
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/eff.rights
=================
* Electronic Frontier and the Bill of Rights
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/faq/archive
=================
* Archive - What is Available in the CAF Archive?
q: What files are available from the Computers and Academic Freedom
archive?
a: The Computers and Academic Freedom archive includes several
...
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/faq/censorship-and-harassment
=================
* Censorship And Harassment
q: Must/should universities ban material that some find offensive
(from Netnews facilities, email, libraries, and student publications,
etc) in order to comply with antiharassment laws?
a: No. The federal courts have said that harassing speech is different
...
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/faq/due-process
=================
* Due Process
q: Should users be suspended from the computer pending formal discipline?
a: No, with one exception. Just as students should not be expelled from
...
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/faq/email.policies
=================
* Email -- Policies
q: Do any universities treat email and computer files as private?
a: Yes, many universities treat email and computer files as private.
...
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/faq/email.privacy
=================
* Email -- Privacy
q: Can (should) my university monitor my email?
a: Ethically (and perhaps legally) email communications should have
...
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/faq/media.control
=================
* University Control of Media
q: Since freedom of the press belongs to those who own presses, a
public university can do anything it wants with the media that it
owns, right?
a: No. Like any organization, the government must work within its
...
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/faq/netnews.liability
=================
* Netnews -- On University Liability for Netnews
q: Does a University reduce its likely liability by screening Netnews
for offensive articles and newsgroups?
a: Not necessarily. By screening articles and newsgroups the
...
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/faq/netnews.reading
=================
* Netnews -- Policies on What Users Read
q: Should my university remove (or restrict) Netnews newsgroups
because some people find them offensive? If it doesn't have the
resources to carry all newsgroups, how should newsgroups be selected?
a: Material should not be restricted just because it is offensive to
...
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/faq/netnews.writing
=================
* Netnews -- Policies on What Users Write
q: Should my university allow students to post to Netnews?
a: Yes. Free inquiry and free expression are an important part of a
...
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/faq/policy
=================
* Policy -- Guidance for Creating and Evaluating
q: What guidance is there for creating or evaluating a computer policy?
a: The first thing to do is to get a copy of your university's Student
...
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/faq/umanitoba.ca
=================
* Canada -- U. of Manitoba -- What's going on?
q: What is going on at the Univeristy of Manitoba in Canada? What is
the Canadian law on obscenity?
a: Here is some information related to the alt.sex* ban at the U. of Manitoba.
...
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/filters.email
=================
* How Unix users can filter out harassing email by themselves
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/library/int-freedom.can
=================
* Intellectual Freedom Statement -- Canadian Library Assoc
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/library/library.porn.real
=================
* Library Porn -- the newspaper article parodied
A real newspaper article published in the Houston Chronicle. The
parody is in file library.porn.
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/library/patron.behavior.draft.ala
=================
* Patron Behavior -- Draft (ALA)
DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT
GUIDELINES FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF POLICIES REGARDING PATRON BEHAVIOR
AND LIBRARY USAGE
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/old.banned.1992
=================
* Computer material that was banned/challenged ...'92 - old version
The first posted version of the list of computer material that was
banned or challenged in academia in 1992.
From caf-talk Caf Nov 16 19:40:17 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,alt.society.civil-liberty,misc.legal
From: greeny@eff.org (J S Greenfield)
Subject: CAF Archive Recent Changes -- books (long)
Message-ID: <1992Nov17.004009.25773@eff.org>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 00:40:09 GMT
Recent Changes to the
* Computers and Academic Freedom (CAF) Archive
-- books
The CAF Archive is an electronic library of information about
computers and academic freedom.
If you have gopher, the archive is browsable with the command:
gopher -p academic/law gopher.eff.org
It is available via anonymous ftp to ftp.eff.org (192.88.144.4) in
directory "pub/academic". It is also available via email. For
information on email access send email to archive-server@eff.org. In
the body of your note include the lines "help" and "index".
For more information, to make contributions, or to report typos
contact J.S. Greenfield (greeny@eff.org).
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/aaup
=================
excerpts: Joint Statement on Rights and Freedoms of Students -- This
is the main statement on student academic freedom.
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/aba
=================
Sexual harassment : the issues and the law / prepared for the
American Bankers Association by Epstein Becker Borsody & Green, P.C.
Washington, D.C. (1120 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Washington 20036) : The
Association, c1982.
review: Old, written in 1982 for Bankers.
Score: 5 of 10
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/aclu.academic-freedom
=================
American Civil Liberties Union.
Academic freedom and civil liberties of students in colleges and
universities / American Civil Liberties Union. New York : American Civil
Liberties Union, 1970.
Review: Very old. Written before much case law was established. Most of
the ideas are incorporated into the Statement on Student Rights. Interesting
but out of date.
Score: 8 of 10
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/ala.defending-books
=================
American Library Association. Young Adult Services Division.
Intellectual Freedom Committee.
Hit list : frequently challenged young adult titles : references to
defend them / prepared by the Intellectual Freedom Committee, Young
Adult Services Division. :1st ed.: Chicago, Il : Young Adult Services
Division, American Library Association, 1989.
Review:
A catalog of frequently challenged books. Each entry is about 3 pages
long and includes a summary of the book, a list of recent challenges to
it, and a bibliography of reviews.
The idea is to document that the books are important.
This might be model of a way to defend newsgroups.
Score: 7 of 10
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/ala.int-freedom
=================
See file ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/libraries/README.
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/american_library_association
=================
American Library Association. _Hit List: Frequently Challenged Young
Adult Titles: References to Defend Them_, 1989
Format: a book
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/anarchists_handbook
=================
title: Anarchist's Handbook
references:
oct_27_1991
misc: _Anarchist's Handbook_
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/anderson,_arthur_james
=================
Anderson, Arthur James. "Politics & Policy (with discussion),"
_Library Journal 10:37-9 May 15, 1985.
Format: an article
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/article_19
=================
Information freedom and censorship : world report 1991 / Article 19
; preface by William Shawcross. Chicago : American Library Association,
1991.
review: Most of the book is a country by country report on censorship.
For the US, it talks about good things like the Constitution
and the FOIA and bad things like the FCC indency rules and the Meese
Commission.
Back of book list international agreements on freedom of
expression and catalogs methods of censorshp and methods
of fighting it.
Score: 7 of 10
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/asheim,_lester
=================
Asheim, Lester. "Selection and Censorship: A Reapprasial", _Wilson
Libary Bulletin_ 58(3):180-84 November 1983
Format: an article
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/berman,_sandford
=================
Berman, Sandford. _Battle of the Books: Literary Censorship
in the Public Schools_, 1989.
Format: a book
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/berninghausem,_david_k
=================
Berninghausem, David K. "Toward an Intellecutal Freedom Theory
for Users of Libraries," Drexel Library Quarterly 18(1):57-81
Format: an article
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/bickel,_robert_d
=================
review: Question and answer book for college admins. Good for what
it is, but doesn't cover civil liberties questions.
Score: 5 to 10
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/bracewell,_william_r
=================
Substantial justice on campus: individual rights v. institutional
needs. Edited by William R. Bracewell. Athens, University of Georgia,
Center for Continuing Education :1973:
Review: Old (1972), but at least it applies to colleges and not just
high schools. It is the proceedings of a conference that met
just after many schools adopted academic freedom policies
and formal judical system. Gives details of the systems
at U. of Wisconsin at Madison, Michigan State, Louisian State,
and U. of Georgia.
Score: 6 of 10
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/butler,_henry_e
=================
Butler, Henry E.
LEGAL ASPECTS OF STUDENT RECORDS TOPEKA, 1972.
uc 18-069881
Review: too old, some interesting history
Score: 3 of 10
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/camp,_william_e
=================
William E. Camp, Julie K. Underwood, Mary Jane Connelly. :Topeka, Kan.:
: National Organization on Legal Problems of Education, c1989.
296 p. ; 23 cm.
Reviews: For grade and high school principles. Section
on student expression is concise and up-to-date.
Score: 6 of 10
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/christensen,_john_o.fbi.libraries
=================
Christensen, John O.
The FBI, libraries, and the library awareness program controversey
:sic: : selected references / John O. Christensen. Monticello, Ill. :
Vance Bibliographies, :1990:
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/christensen,_john_o.int_freeedom
=================
Christensen, John O.
Intellectual freedom and libraries : a selective bibliography /
John O. Christensen. Monticello, Ill. : Vance Bibliographies, :1991:
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/christensen,_john_o.legal_issues.libraries
=================
Christensen, John O.
Legal issues in public and school libraries : some recent
references / John O. Christensen. Monticello, Ill. : Vance
Bibliographies, :1990:
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/christensen,_john_o.porn-and_libraries
=================
Christensen, John O.
Obscenity, pornography, and libraries : a selective bibliography /
John O. Christensen. Monticello, Ill. : Vance Bibliographies, :1991:
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/coggins,_timothy_l
=================
Coggins, Timothy L. "Book Removals from School Libraries and Student's
First Amendment Rights," School Law Bulletin 17(3):17-21 Summer 1986.
Format: an article
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/cole,_elsa_kircher
=================
Sexual harassment on campus : a legal compendium / edited by Elsa
Kircher Cole. 2nd ed. Washington, D.C. (1 Dupont Circle, Suite 620,
Washington 20036) : National Association of College and University
Attorneys, 1990.
Review: Like the first edition, it does not talk about student-
student harassment or student freedom of expression. Mostly
about teacher student harassment.
Score: 7 of 10
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/conte,_alba
=================
Review: Enclopedic coverage of workplace sexual harassment.
However, it generally doesn't apply students at a university.
Score: 5 of 10
Conte, Alba.
Sexual harassment in the workplace : law and practice / Alba Conte.
New York : Wiley, c1990.
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/cornog,_martha
=================
review: Admins who want to make a thoughtful (and defensible) decision
about carrying alt.sex and similar newsgroups might want to look at
this book. It is written (mostly) by librarians for (mostly)
librarians.
Score: 8 of 10
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/crl
=================
bib:
The Center for Research Libraries manual of interlibrary loan
policies and procedures. Chicago : The Center, 1988.
review: Poor quality. Very little talk of policy.
Score: 5 of 10
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/ficociello,_tony
=================
Ficociello, Tony. "Censorship, Book Selection, and the Marketplace
of Ideas," Top of the News 41(1):33-38 Fall 1984
Format: an article
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/forester,_tom
=================
review: Lots of stuff about hackers; nothing about freedom of expression.
Mostly comp.risks stuff
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/gaddy,_dale
=================
Gaddy, Dale.
Rights and freedoms of public school students: directions from the
1960s. Topeka, Kan., National Organization on Legal Problems of
Education, 1971.
Review: Old (1972) and about high schools
Score: 3 of 10
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/glasser,_ira
=================
* Visions of Liberty -- Ira Glasser and Bob Adelman -- Review
A mini-review of _Visions of Liberty_ by Ira Glasser (former executive
director of the ACLU) and Bob Adelman. It says in part,
"Great book on the history and state of civil liberties in America."
Includes ordering information.
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/gora,_joel_d.reporters
=================
review: Much the same info as book on rights of authors and artists, but
more out of date.
Score: 6 of 10
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/hendrickson,_robert_m
=================
review: Good because it talks about contractual relationship
and talks about colleges not high schools
Score: 9 of 10
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/hoffman,_frank
=================
Hoffman, Frank. _Intellectual Freedom and Censorship: An Annotated
Bibliography_, 1989.
Format: a book
Review: A comprehensive, book-length, annotated bibliography of
intellectual freedom and censorship.
Score: 9 of 10
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/hopkins,_dianne_mcaff
=================
Hopkins, Dianne McAff. "The School Library Media Specialist: Dealing
with Complaints about Materials," Catholic Library World 56(4):172-74
November 1984.
Format: an article
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/is_it_legal
=================
"Is It Legal?" See issues of Newsletter of Intellectual Freedom.
Format: an article
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/kiesler,_sara
=================
Computing and change on campus / edited by Sara Kiesler and Lee
Sproull. Cambridge ; New York : Cambridge University Press, 1987.
Review: A collection of papers. Topics include the effect of computer
communications on students and professors. Bulk of the book is about
effects of computers at CMU (till 1986). Academic freedom issues are
not covered. There are a few pages about bboards.
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/lee,_earl
=================
Lee, Earl. "Library Censorship after Webster," American Libraries
20(11):1044-45, 1047-48 December 1989.
[Does anyone know what "Webster" the title refers to? - Carl]
Format: an article
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/lesbian_and_gay_media_advocates
=================
Review: A great book for any group that wants to make
its case in the media. Almost always suggests fighting
back speech with good speech rather than supression.
Score: 9 of 10
bib:
Lesbian and Gay Media Advocates.
Talk back : the gay person's guide to media action / Lesbian and
Gay Media Advocates. Boston : Alyson Publications, 1982.
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/lockhart,_william_b
=================
review: A giant books with a whole section on "Procedural Due Process
in Non-Criminal Cases".
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/manley,_will
=================
Manley, Will. "Facing the Public (book slection and intellectual
freedom)," Wilson Library Bulletin 61:32-3 February 1987.
Format: an article
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/marsh,_dave
=================
review: Lots of great ideas. Defends popular culture as much as high art.
score: 9 fo 10
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/mashaw,_jerry_l
=================
Review: More of a history book than a handbook
Score: 3 of 10
Mashaw, Jerry L.
Due process in the administrative state / Jerry L. Mashaw. :New
Haven, CT: : Yale University, c1985.
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/mawdsley,_ralph_d
=================
Mawdsley, Ralph D.
Free expression and censorship : public policy and the law / Ralph
D. Mawdsley, Alice L. Mawdsley. :Topeka, Kan.: : NOLPE, c1988.
Review: Mostly about high school student newspapers. Give history
of _Kuhlmeier v. Hazelwood_ but it can't guess at the effects
of that decision.
Score: 6 of 10
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/mcghehey,_m_a
=================
School law for a new decade / edited by M.A. McGhehey. Topeka, Kan.
: National Organization on Legal Problems of Education, 1981.
Review: Has a nice chapter, written by Edgar Bittle, on "How
to Conduct an Administrative Hearing".
Score: 8 of 10
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/michigan_library_association
=================
review: How librarians select select books and magazines (and
newsgroups?) and how they fight censorship attempts.
Score: 10 of 10
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/moran,_k_d
=================
Moran, K. D.
The legal aspects of school communications / K. D. Moran and M. A.
McGhehey. Topeka, Kan. : National Organization on Legal Problems of
Education, 1980.
Has sections of campus mail, (high school) student newspapers,
and a little bit on school libraries.
Score: 7 of 10
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/moss,_lee_a
=================
Moss, Lee A. "A Case Against Censorship of School Libraries," Georgia
Social Schience Journal 20(1):4-6 Winter 1989.
Format: an article
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/oboler,_eli_m.defend_int_freedom
=================
Oboler, Eli M. _Defending Intellectual Freedom: the Library
and the Censor_, 1983.
Format: a book
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/oboler,_eli_m.lib_tech_and_freedom
=================
Oboler, Eli M. _To Free the Mind: Libraries, Technology, and
Intellectual Freedom_, 1983.
Format: a book
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/otten,_wayne_n
=================
Review: Seems to cover basic stuff. Nothing on privacy or freedom
of expression. Getting out of date.
Score: 7 of 10
Outten, Wayne N.
The rights of employees : the basic ACLU guide to an employee's
rights / Wayne N. Outten with Noah A. Kinigstein. Toronto ; New York :
Bantam Books, 1984, c1983.
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/pole-j-r
=================
The American Constitution : for and against : the Federalist and
anti-Federalist papers / selected and edited, with an introduction by
J.R. Pole. New York : Hill and Wang, 1987.
Review: Contains most of the interesting papers on both
sides.
Score: 8 of 10
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/pool,_ithiel_de_sola
=================
review: Talks about the danger and hope of technology (such
as computer networks) and freedom of expression.
Talks about how the FCC regulation of content is
a violation of the first amendment.
Score: 9 of 10
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/reichman,_henry
=================
review: how librarians select select books and
magazines (and newsgroups?) and how they fight censorship attempt.
Score: 10 of 10
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/rossow,_lawrence_f
=================
Rossow, Lawrence F.
Search and seizure in the public schools / Lawrence F. Rossow.
Topeka, Kan. : NOLPE, c1987.
Review: Covers _New Jersey v. T.L.O_. Applies to high schools.
Score: 6 of 10
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/rudovsky,_david
=================
Review: Not very applicable to schools (thank goodness)
Score: 6 of 10
Rudovsky, David.
The rights of prisoners : the basic ACLU guide to prisoners' rights
/ David Rudovsky, Alvin J. Bronstein, Edward I. Koren. 4th ed.
Carbondale : Southern Illinois University Press, 1988.
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/schmidt,_c
=================
Schmidt, C. James. "Intellectual Freedom and Technlogy: Deja Vu?"
North Carolina Libraries 46:129-30 Fall 1987.
Format: an article
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/smith,_robert_ellis
=================
Compilation of state and Federal privacy laws, 1981 / by Robert
Ellis Smith. Washington, D.C. : Privacy Journal, 1981.
Review: Intersting but out of date. This edition has sections
of computer crime, mailing lists, state constitutional protections,
Score: 9 of 10
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/smolla,_rodney
=================
* Free Speech in an Open Society -- Rodney A. Smolla
A review of _Free Speech in an Open Society_ by Rodney A. Smolla. The review
says, in part, that the book is
"New, up to date, and has lots of references to relevant court cases."
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/sproull,_lee
=================
Sproull, Lee.
Connections : new ways of working in the networked organization /
Lee Sproull, Sara Kiesler. Cambridge, Mass. : MIT Press, c1991.
Review: Talks about how people and workgroups use computer media
(including email and newsgroups).
Score: 7 of 10
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/student_affairs_and_the_law
=================
lcs:
KF4243S881983 STUDENT AFFAIRS AND THE LAW $SAN FRANCISCO 82-84204
376685 1983 1 ADDED: 840209
review: defines due process, contracutal relationsships, not so much
on free speech
Score: 8 of 10
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/sumerford,_steve
=================
Sumerford, Steve. "The Public Library: Offensive by Design," Public
Libraries 26(2):60-62 Summer 1987.
Format: an article
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/sussman,_leonard_r
=================
title: POWER, THE PRESS AND THE TECHNOLOGY OF FREEDOM
lcs:
PN4748.D44S871989 SUSSMAN, LEONARD R.
POWER, THE PRESS AND THE TECHNOLOGY OF FREEDOM$ NEW YORK, N.Y. 89-16806
review: Not nearly as good as the title suggests. Talks about the formal
press but very little about grassroots information gathering.
Score: 6 of 10
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/swan,_john
=================
Swan, John.
The freedom to lie : a debate about democracy / John Swan and Noel
Peattie ; foreword by Robert Franklin. Jefferson, N.C. : McFarland,
1989.
Review: The book form of a debate between to librarians, one
supporting the idea that bad ideas like "the Holocaust didn't
happened" should be avoided by libraries, the other supporting
the idea that all ideas should be presented.
Score: 8 of 10
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/tice,_terrence_n
=================
review: Looks clear and easy to read but a little old
Score: 8 of 10
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/van_tol,_joan_e.harass
=================
Sexual harassment on campus : a legal compendium. Washington, D.C.
: National Association of College and University Attorneys, 1988.
Review: Worthless because it came out before the _Doe v. U. of Michigan_
and _UWM Post v. of U. of Wisconsin_.
Score: 3 of 10
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/vate
=================
review: Much the same info as book on rights of authors and artists, but
more out of date.
Score: 6 of 10
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/books/young,_d._parke
=================
review: Bound copies of a newsletter. Covers lots of stuff including
some civil libertities stuff like are Shanty towns protected
speech? (yes) Church state, etc.
Score: 10 of 10
From caf-talk Caf Nov 16 19:41:54 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,comp.admin.policy
From: greeny@eff.org (J S Greenfield)
Subject: CAF Archive Recent Changes -- policies/statements
Message-ID: <1992Nov17.004146.25912@eff.org>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 00:41:46 GMT
Recent Changes to the
* Computers and Academic Freedom (CAF) Archive -- policies and statements
The CAF Archive is an electronic library of information about
computers and academic freedom.
If you have gopher, the archive is browsable with the command:
gopher -p academic/law gopher.eff.org
It is available via anonymous ftp to ftp.eff.org (192.88.144.4) in
directory "pub/academic". It is also available via email. For
information on email access send email to archive-server@eff.org. In
the body of your note include the lines "help" and "index".
For more information, to make contributions, or to report typos
contact J.S. Greenfield (greeny@eff.org).
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/policies/bostonu.edu.critique
=================
* Edu -- Boston U. -- Critique
Critique of the ethics policy for Boston University Information Technology
Summary: 'In the name of protecting privacy, the policy attacks
privacy. It says the University has the power to "without notice, ...
inspect ... any data [or] file". It imposes speech restrict[ion]s that
would be ridiculed if applied to the campus as a whole. It says the
user may not "mak[e] accessible offensive [or] annoying material"'
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/policies/eng.hawaii.edu
=================
* Edu -- U. of Hawaii -- College of Eng
College of Engineering Computer Facility Policy on Computer Usage and
User Responsibilities
-- University of Hawaii at Manoa College of Engineering
(critiqued)
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/policies/eng.hawaii.edu.critique
=================
* Edu -- U. of Hawaii -- College of Eng. -- Critique
Critique of College of Engineering Computer Facility Policy on
Computer Usage and User Responsibilities
-- University of Hawaii at Manoa College of Engineering
"The policy seems to be a pretty good attempt at making the rules
explicit. Several parts of the policy, however, likely violates legal
and moral requirements for due process, privacy, free expression, and
user participation."
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/policies/engr.uky.edu
=================
* Edu -- U. of Kentucky -- Eng. Computing Cen -- Draft
An unofficial, draft of a "Student Access and Use Policy"
critiqued
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/policies/ethics.iastate.edu.critique
=================
* Edu -- Iowa State U. -- Ethics -- Critique
"This is a critique of Computer Ethics Statement for Iowa State
University. The due process protection of the policy is good. The
privacy protection is unclear. Free expression protection is poor.
(The policy imposes speech restrictions on email and other computer
media. Specifically, it prohibits rude expression and any expression
of a political nature. In my opinion, these speech restrictions
violate academic freedom and the law.)"
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/policies/mankato.msus.edu
=================
* Edu -- Minnesota -- Mankato State U.
Mankato State University's "Policy on Academic Computer Usage" as posted at
the Academic Computer Center. It says in part,
"The faculty/staff of the University reserves the right to examine files
and accounting system information generated through student use of the
University computing facilities.
"Academic computing resources on the Mankato State University Campus
are for use in the instructional, research, and outreach activities of
the University only."
(Critiqued)
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/policies/mankato.msus.edu.critique
=================
* Edu -- Minnesota -- Mankato State U. -- Critique
Comments on Mankato State University's "Policy on Academic Computer Usage" as
posted at the Academic Computer Center.
One comment suggests that part of the policy is "so vague as to be
unenforceable..."
Another critique says,
"These statments lead me to believe that your philosophy behind the policy
is that students are only allowed to use the computers for _specific_ class
projects."
and,
"Students may not send e-mail, read news, write programs other than
those assigned, experiment with the OS or languages, use word proccessors
except as required for the assignments."
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/policies/metu.bitnet.critique
=================
* Turkey -- Middle East Technical U. -- Critique
This is a critique of the Computer Policy of Middle East Technical
University (METU) in Ankara, Turkey. Most of my references are to US
centered documents, the ones to which I am most familar.
The METU policy provides no due process protection and bans much
speech. In this, it is similar to some of policies of universities
such as Iowa State, U. of Texas, and U. of Illinois. In contrast to
these the U.S. speech restrictions, METU's bans are clear and (as far
as I know) legal.
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/policies/mu.edu.critique
=================
* Edu -- Marquette U. -- Critique
Critique of Policy on Authorized Use of M.U. Public Computer Systems. Marquette
University is a private religious university.
Computer Services presupposes that anyone it accuses of misuse is in
fact an offender. It sounds as if a user could be permanently expelled
from the system without ever having a chance to speak, without the
chance of a formal hearing, and without an opportunity to appeal.
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/policies/ncsa.uiuc.edu.critique
=================
* Edu -- U. of Illinois -- NCSA -- Critique
Critique of the email policy for the National Center for Supercomputer
Applications, a department of the University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign
Summary: "Although the policy offers much good advice and addresses
legitimate security concerns, it is overly broad and vague. Moreover,
it is inconsistent with the principles of Academic Freedom,
Constitutional rights, and University policies with respect to freedom
of expression and privacy." The policy does not provide for due
process. It makes criticizing the NCSA or the University in email,
grounds for a email search.
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/policies/nwnetuse.txt
=================
* Net -- Northwestnet
NorthWestNet acceptable use policy
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/policies/old.bostonu.edu
=================
* Edu -- Boston U. -- Old
Ethics policy for Boston University Information Technology
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/policies/pitt.edu
=================
* Edu -- U. of Pittsburgh
The University of Pittsburgh Guidelines for Ethical Use from "User's
Guide to Academic Computing" and Computer Access and Use policy
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/policies/princeton.edu
=================
* Edu -- Princeton U. -- C.I.T.
1992-1993 Guidelines for use of Campus and Network Computing Resources
maintained by the Office of Computing and Information Technology at
Princeton University. In part, it states that "Abusive or harassing
behavior, verbal or physical, which demeans, intimidates, threatens, or
injures another because of his or her personal characteristics or beliefs
is subject to University disciplinary sanctions...."
(Critiqued)
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/policies/princeton.edu.critique
=================
* Edu -- Princeton U. -- C.I.T. -- Critique
Critiques of the 1992-1993 Guidelines for use of Campus and Network Computing
Resources maintained by the Office of Computing and Information Technology at
Princeton University.
One critique notes that "The policy does not address due process...user privacy
and university searches at all."
Another critique, from an individual at Princeton, offers some additional
insight into the meaning of the policy.
A third critique says, in part "...who is it to determine the border between
reasonable use and misuse? The whole policy does not state any means of dealing
with conflicts."
A fourth critique suggests that Princeton could adopt a workstation-locking
policy similar to that of MIT. "MIT's Athena workstation policy is that you
can lock it for no more than 20 minutes before someone can feel free to reboot
it or otherwise 'forcibly unlock' it."
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/policies/rice.edu
=================
* Edu -- Rice U.
Computer policies for Rice University, especially Owlnet. (Rice is a
private University in Houston, Texas.) Interesting features include a
Sys Admin Statement of Ethics and student committee that advises on
policy and handles some of the discipline.
(critiqued)
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/policies/rice.edu.critique
=================
* Edu -- Rice U. -- Critique
Critique of the Rice University System Administrator Statement of Ethics.
It says in part,
"Strong parts of the statement keep users informed and limit the cases
when a user's files can be modified. The statement could be improved by
distinguishing between different reasons for sys admin access to files...
and by detailing the authorization, notification, and documentation
requirements for each. As it stands, the policy seem[s] incompatible with
Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act."
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/policies/rochester.edu
=================
* Edu -- University of Rochester
The College of Engineering's Computer Use Policy. It says, in part
"In the normal course of system administration, the staff may have
to examine files, mail, and printer listings to gather sufficient
information to diagnose and correct problems with system software,
or to determine if a user is acting in violation of the policies set
forth in this document. The staff has the right to do this."
(critiqued)
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/policies/rochester.edu.critique
=================
* Edu -- University of Rochester -- Critique
Critiques of the College of Engineering's Computer Use Policy. One
critique states, in part,
"Generally speaking, staff should respect privacy when possible. If job
duties require staff to break privacy, then they should be bound by
confidentiality considerations. Even confidentiality is not absolute."
Another critique states, in part,
"'Dragnets' are inappropriate management behavior."
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/policies/stanford.edu
=================
* Stanford U. -- Netnews Selection Statements
"In 1989 rec.humor.funny was suppressed in some of the Stanford
University computers. After a campaign it was re-installed in those
computers."
This file contains
1) the "Statement of Protest about the AIR Censorship of rec.humor.funny"
2) a statement by the Stanford faculty committee on libraries
3) Notes from Professor John McCarthy on how censorship was fought at Stanford
(also see "pub/academic/cases/jmcabstract")
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/policies/udel.edu
=================
* Edu -- U. of Delaware
The Policy for Responsible Computing Use at the University of Delaware
This policy is the result of 61 months of work! (also see
old.udel.edu, old.udel.edu.critique, old.very.udel.edu, and
old.very.udel.edu.critique.)
(critiqued)
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/policies/udel.edu.critique
=================
* Edu -- U. of Delaware -- Critique
Critique of the Policy for Responsible Computing Use at the University
of Delaware. Says that much of the policy seems vacuous.
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/policies/unm.edu.pointer
=================
* Misc -- Pointer to and Index of U. of New Mexico Policy Archive
The files available via anonymous ftp from ariel.unm.edu in directory
/ethics.
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/policies/virginia.pen.edu.critique
=================
* Net -- Virginia -- PEN -- Critique
Critique of Acceptable Use Policy Virginia's Public Edcuation Network (PEN).
Points out factual errors. Says that speech restrictions are unconstitutional.
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/policies/vt.edu.critique
=================
* Edu -- Virginia Tech -- Critique
Critique of Acceptable Usage Statement from Virgina Tech
Summary: The policy shows good user participation and due process.
Privacy could be improved by detailing the procedure by which searches
are authorized. Freedom of expression could be improved by removing
vague speech restrictions.
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/statements/caf-statement
=================
* Computer and Academic Freedom Statement -- Draft
This is an attempt to codify the application of academic freedom to
academic computers. It reflects our seven months of on-line discussion
about computers and academic freedom. It covers free expression, due
process, privacy, and user participation.
Comments and suggestions are very welcome (especially when posted to
CAF-talk). All the documents referenced are available on-line.
(Critiqued).
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/statements/ontario.univ-ministry.memo
=================
* Ontario Ministry of Coll. and Univ. -- Offensive Computer Material
A memorandum from Deputy Minister Bernard Shapiro regarding the accessibility
of offensive materials from college and university computers, along with
additional clarification. The memo says, in part "It is my expectation that
each institution will have policies and procedures in place to discourage the
use of its computer systems for access to, or sending of, racist and/or
pornographic material."
The clarification says, in part, that the "Ministry has no authority to
intervene in the universities...the universities are autonomous."
=================
ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/statements/rfc1244.txt
=================
* Site Security Handbook
This FYI RFC is a first attempt at providing Internet users guidance
on how to deal with security issues in the Internet. As such, this
document is necessarily incomplete.
From caf-talk Caf Nov 16 23:22:55 1992
From: entpph@ritvax.isc.rit.edu
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,alt.dreams
Subject: Re: [alt.dreams] Re: McElwaine's postings (was Re: THE DIVINE MASTERS, and Dreams)
Message-ID: <1992Nov17.034036.17107@ultb.isc.rit.edu>
Date: 17 Nov 92 03:40:36 GMT
In article <1992Nov16.144854.9296@ms.uky.edu>, morgan@ms.uky.edu (Wes Morgan)
writes:
>>Newsgroups: alt.dreams
>>From: entpph@ritvax.isc.rit.edu
>>Subject: Re: McElwaine's postings (was Re: THE DIVINE MASTERS, and Dreams)
>>
>>Many thanks to Gary Trujillo for bringing to light attempts to muzzle
>>Robert McElwaine. McElwaine's beliefs couldn't be farther from my own,
>>but attempts to deprive him of his rights by revoking his "privleges"
>>are unacceptable.
>
>Um, his privileges aren't being revoked yet; see my comments below.
[a lotta stuff deleted]
>
>--Wes
>
>--
>MORGAN@UKCC | Wes Morgan | ...!ukma!ukecc!morgan
You are quite right, his "privleges" (I insist on the quotes, we may
be talking about a right, not a privilege) are not being revoked yet,
there is only the threat.
I hear your excellent points clearly. Robert McElwaine is a bother/
nuisance. In response to my email of support to him, he sent me
an ephamplet. But is he any more than that? Is he a bigger bother
than a groan and a quick stab at the 'n' key? (And surely he is
not alone on the net in engendering that reaction.)
What would happen if he were ignored rather than fussed over?
Back to my first point: if I wanted to deprive a person of a freedom,
the first thing I would try is to tell him it was a privilege, not
a right.
I am looking forward to your response.
Erik Timmerman
From caf-talk Caf Nov 17 08:56:33 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,alt.dreams
From: morgan@engr.uky.edu (Wes Morgan)
Subject: Mailing list etiquette/responsibilities, was Re: McElwaine's
Message-ID: <1992Nov17.85044.6983@ms.uky.edu>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 13:50:44 GMT
entpph@ritvax.isc.rit.edu wrote:
>I hear your excellent points clearly. Robert McElwaine is a bother/
>nuisance. In response to my email of support to him, he sent me
>an ephamplet. But is he any more than that? Is he a bigger bother
>than a groan and a quick stab at the 'n' key? (And surely he is
>not alone on the net in engendering that reaction.)
>What would happen if he were ignored rather than fussed over?
A few quick points about email and mailing lists:
- (the obvious, but oft-forgotten point) Many sites still pay
for their feeds. I have several subscribers whose sole mail
feed comes through a long-distance phone line. Those people
are paying enough for the email they want; why should they be
forced to pay for material they don't want to see?
- Most mailing lists are dedicated to a particular topic; very
few lists are true 'unlimited expression' fora. I can think
of several lists which approach 'unlimited' status, but I would
think that subscribers of those lists know what to expect.
- Since most lists are dedicated to a particular topic, I believe
that the moderator/maintainer of the list has an obligation to
keep the discussion "on course". Actions under this umbrella
might include a gentle nudge ("This really doesn't belong here"),
removal of messages (moderated lists do this all the time), or
even removal of users from the list.
- Mailing lists are a distribution-driven mechanism, not a receipt-
driven mechanism; hence, anyone may send material to a mailing list.
(There are exceptions; some list software will only allow submis-
sions by subscribers.) Given this openness, some actions are out-
side the purview of the maintainer/moderator. In those cases, it
is (IMHO) proper for the list maintainer to request assistance from
sysadmins to correct/eliminate problems.
- Most mailers do not support the notion of a "killfile". Therefore,
most mail readers have to wade through all of it....
To answer your question directly, here are the results of "just ignoring"
problems such as McElwaine's postings:
- If the list is moderated, the moderator still has to wade
through (or at least examine) each submission. If the list
is unmoderated, EVERYONE will have to wade through it. That
adds up to quite a bit of time.
- Some machines will still burn up CPU/network time transmitting
the stuff. I believe that some of our European neighbors still
pay for network traffic on a per-packet basis; I don't think they
want to pay for this stuff on an unrelated mailing list.
(You may think that this is negligible, but I think differently.
My list has subscribers in Korea and Singapore; the quality of
the network links to those countries often requires three or
four attempts to deliver a single message. Multiply that by
X number of unrelated messages, and that represents a CHUNK
of CPU time).
- Some sites still get their email feeds over phone lines. The
cost issue is non-negligible; they're paying real money (as
opposed to network sites that burn "funny money" with NNTP).
- Some mailing lists are automatically archived; that implies that
sites will burn up resources in long-term storage of this unrelated
crud.
- Mailing lists with significant amounts of unrelated crud tend to
lose subscribers; as a result, the "knowledge base" of the list
deteriorates. This is especially sad in a technical list.
You may think that each of these is "a minor problem", and I might even
agree with you; when taken together, however, their collective impact on
a list can be devastating.
>Back to my first point: if I wanted to deprive a person of a freedom,
>the first thing I would try is to tell him it was a privilege, not
>a right.
The "right of free speech" is NOT the "right to use someone else's soapbox".
If this fellow would like to start his own mailing list (or moderated news-
group, for that matter), more power to him; however, the assertion that any
given forum is automatically a suitable place for free expression is neither
proper nor defensible (in my opinion). The counterargument to such an asser-
tion is found in the "limited public forum" doctrine endorsed by the US
Supreme Court.
--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
From caf-talk Caf Nov 17 14:10:56 1992
From: gst@gnosys.svle.ma.us (Gary S. Trujillo)
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,alt.dreams
Subject: Re: [alt.dreams] Re: McElwaine's postings (was Re: THE DIVINE MASTERS, and Dreams)
Message-ID: <1992Nov17.151436.7966@gnosys.svle.ma.us>
Date: 17 Nov 92 15:14:36 GMT
[ I am directing followups to alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk, since even this
discussion is *not* appropriate for alt.dreams. However, I'd like those
who became aware of the issue to be aware of where they can go to continue
the discussion. --Gary ]
In <1992Nov16.144854.9296@ms.uky.edu> morgan@ms.uky.edu (Wes Morgan) writes:
> Um, his privileges aren't being revoked yet; see my comments below.
> ...
> I suggest that we take a step back and look at the entire picture.
> Mr. McElwaine has been sending materials to several (many?) electronic
> mailing lists and bulletin boards. These materials seem to have little
> in common with the ongoing discussions on those lists/boards/groups. I
> would suggest that the mere existence of a mailing list does NOT imply
> that it may be used as a forum for unlimited free expression...
I find myself on both sides of the issue. On the one hand, I am annoyed
to find some of the things McElwaine has been posting to some newsgroups
I frequent which have very little, if anything, to do with the subject
matter of the newsgroup. Just as bad, Robert has made no attempt to even
respond to requests that he attempt to make a connection, even if in the
form of some introduction which provides his own opinion. He seems to be
in the business of just plastering prefabricated electronic tracts on his
favorite subjects hither and yon. I strenuously object to this kind of
activity.
But let's look at the non-electronic analogue - it seems to be someting
like notices posted on telephone poles, the way I recall they are in
the fair town of Berkeley, California, where I was once a student. One
can choose to read the stuff or not. I was never annoyed by such things,
and would sometimes stop to read some particular notice that caught my
eye.
However, I would have objected had such things been bound into my text-
books, in the same way that I object to commercials in TV programs, which
is why I never watch commercial TV except for Star Trek, which I tape, so
I can zap the suckers when I watch the show later. I have similar feel-
ings about the commercial announcements broadcast on the station platform
electronic displays on BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit), so that when one
wants to get information about which train is approaching, it may be
necessary to read an ad. Some people don't mind. I do. I feel that a
public service - paid for by taxes (as is Internet, remember), should not
carry commercial announcements. Maybe I'm straying a little bit away from
the discussion about McElwaine here - but I think he is selling something,
in a way; he's acting as an agent for a quasi-religious society, among
other things, perhaps. What he's peddling are prefabricated ideas, which
makes them a lot like commercials. They represent services sold at a
price. (I would not feel the same way if someone were to talk about some
group, like Eckankar, if the person were talking about that organization
in an appropriate forum, using his or her own words, with an occasional
quote from some piece of literature published by the organization. I
feel that such activity is perfectly legitimate.)
On the other hand, I believe in the principle of "let the punishment
fit the crime," and wonder whether the device of revoking network
privileges is an appropriate gesture to rid ourselves of the bother that
such things might represent. Or is there some other principle at stake
here - does what McElwaine is doing really represent a misuse of his
Internet account?
I could spend more time developing an argument on either side, but I
don't have the time right now. I just wanted to throw out a few ideas
at present. What do others feel?
Gary
--
Gary S. Trujillo gst@gnosys.svle.ma.us
Somerville, Massachusetts {wjh12,bu.edu,spdcc,ima,cdp}!gnosys!gst
From caf-talk Caf Nov 18 00:24:13 1992
Newsgroups: news.admin.misc,alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.d,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,news.admin.policy,news.sysadmin
From: scott@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Scott Hazen Mueller)
Subject: Please stop using news.sysadmin
Message-ID:
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 04:39:18 GMT
Some B News site somewhere has aliased news.sysadmin to news.admin.technical,
and I'm being deluged with cross-posted arguments about Usenet and child
pornography. News.sysadmin has been rmgrouped, so please stop using it;
at least, please stop cross-posting this discussion to news.sysadmin. I
believe from my understanding of the mechanism that everything that I'm
being sent has already hit most of the world, so I'm going to dump any
further submissions I get that appear to be part of this situation.
(For those who don't understand how this works, in the B News world aliasing
an unmoderated group to a moderated group causes the moderator (me, in this
case) to be sent a copy of every posting.)
Thank you.
--
Scott Hazen Mueller scott@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG or (ames|pyramid|tandem)!zorch!scott
Moderator, ba.announce; submissions to ba-announce@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG.
Moderator, rec.arts.sf.announce; submissions to sf-announce@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG.
Moderator, news.admin.technical; submissions to natech@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG.
Newsgroups: alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.d,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,news.admin.misc,news.admin.policy,news.sysadmin
Subject: Please stop using news.sysadmin
Summary: crossposts, ack!
Followup-To: news.admin.misc
Distribution: world
Organization: SF-Bay Public-Access Unix
Keywords: ack, phppft!
Some B News site somewhere has aliased news.sysadmin to news.admin.technical,
and I'm being deluged with cross-posted arguments about Usenet and child
pornography. News.sysadmin has been rmgrouped, so please stop using it;
at least, please stop cross-posting this discussion to news.sysadmin. I
believe from my understanding of the mechanism that everything that I'm
being sent has already hit most of the world, so I'm going to dump any
further submissions I get that appear to be part of this situation.
(For those who don't understand how this works, in the B News world aliasing
an unmoderated group to a moderated group causes the moderator (me, in this
case) to be sent a copy of every posting.)
Thank you.
--
Scott Hazen Mueller scott@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG or (ames|pyramid|tandem)!zorch!scott
Moderator, ba.announce; submissions to ba-announce@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG.
Moderator, rec.arts.sf.announce; submissions to sf-announce@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG.
Moderator, news.admin.technical; submissions to natech@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG.
Newsgroups: news.sysadmin,alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.d,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,news.admin.misc,news.admin.policy
Subject: Please stop using news.sysadmin
Summary: crossposts, ack!
Followup-To: news.admin.misc
Distribution: world
Organization: SF-Bay Public-Access Unix
Keywords: ack, phppft!
Some B News site somewhere has aliased news.sysadmin to news.admin.technical,
and I'm being deluged with cross-posted arguments about Usenet and child
pornography. News.sysadmin has been rmgrouped, so please stop using it;
at least, please stop cross-posting this discussion to news.sysadmin. I
believe from my understanding of the mechanism that everything that I'm
being sent has already hit most of the world, so I'm going to dump any
further submissions I get that appear to be part of this situation.
(For those who don't understand how this works, in the B News world aliasing
an unmoderated group to a moderated group causes the moderator (me, in this
case) to be sent a copy of every posting.)
Thank you.
--
Scott Hazen Mueller scott@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG or (ames|pyramid|tandem)!zorch!scott
Moderator, ba.announce; submissions to ba-announce@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG.
Moderator, rec.arts.sf.announce; submissions to sf-announce@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG.
Moderator, news.admin.technical; submissions to natech@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG.
Newsgroups: alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.d,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,news.admin.misc,news.admin.policy,news.sysadmin
Subject: Please stop using news.sysadmin
Summary: crossposts, ack!
Followup-To: news.admin.misc
Distribution: world
Organization: SF-Bay Public-Access Unix
Keywords: ack, phppft!
Some B News site somewhere has aliased news.sysadmin to news.admin.technical,
and I'm being deluged with cross-posted arguments about Usenet and child
pornography. News.sysadmin has been rmgrouped, so please stop using it;
at least, please stop cross-posting this discussion to news.sysadmin. I
believe from my understanding of the mechanism that everything that I'm
being sent has already hit most of the world, so I'm going to dump any
further submissions I get that appear to be part of this situation.
(For those who don't understand how this works, in the B News world aliasing
an unmoderated group to a moderated group causes the moderator (me, in this
case) to be sent a copy of every posting.)
Thank you.
--
Scott Hazen Mueller scott@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG or (ames|pyramid|tandem)!zorch!scott
Moderator, ba.announce; submissions to ba-announce@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG.
Moderator, rec.arts.sf.announce; submissions to sf-announce@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG.
Moderator, news.admin.technical; submissions to natech@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG.
Newsgroups: news.sysadmin,alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.d,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,news.admin.misc,news.admin.policy
Subject: Please stop using news.sysadmin
Summary: crossposts, ack!
Followup-To: news.admin.misc
Distribution: world
Organization: SF-Bay Public-Access Unix
Keywords: ack, phppft!
Some B News site somewhere has aliased news.sysadmin to news.admin.technical,
and I'm being deluged with cross-posted arguments about Usenet and child
pornography. News.sysadmin has been rmgrouped, so please stop using it;
at least, please stop cross-posting this discussion to news.sysadmin. I
believe from my understanding of the mechanism that everything that I'm
being sent has already hit most of the world, so I'm going to dump any
further submissions I get that appear to be part of this situation.
(For those who don't understand how this works, in the B News world aliasing
an unmoderated group to a moderated group causes the moderator (me, in this
case) to be sent a copy of every posting.)
Thank you.
--
Scott Hazen Mueller scott@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG or (ames|pyramid|tandem)!zorch!scott
Moderator, ba.announce; submissions to ba-announce@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG.
Moderator, rec.arts.sf.announce; submissions to sf-announce@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG.
Moderator, news.admin.technical; submissions to natech@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG.
Newsgroups: alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.d,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,news.admin.misc,news.admin.policy,news.sysadmin
Subject: Please stop using news.sysadmin
Summary: crossposts, ack!
Followup-To: news.admin.misc
Distribution: world
Organization: SF-Bay Public-Access Unix
Keywords: ack, phppft!
Some B News site somewhere has aliased news.sysadmin to news.admin.technical,
and I'm being deluged with cross-posted arguments about Usenet and child
pornography. News.sysadmin has been rmgrouped, so please stop using it;
at least, please stop cross-posting this discussion to news.sysadmin. I
believe from my understanding of the mechanism that everything that I'm
being sent has already hit most of the world, so I'm going to dump any
further submissions I get that appear to be part of this situation.
(For those who don't understand how this works, in the B News world aliasing
an unmoderated group to a moderated group causes the moderator (me, in this
case) to be sent a copy of every posting.)
Thank you.
--
Scott Hazen Mueller scott@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG or (ames|pyramid|tandem)!zorch!scott
Moderator, ba.announce; submissions to ba-announce@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG.
Moderator, rec.arts.sf.announce; submissions to sf-announce@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG.
Moderator, news.admin.technical; submissions to natech@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG.
From caf-talk Caf Nov 18 17:09:33 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [news.admin.misc, et al.] ALERT RE POSTINGS AND CORNELL ACCESS TO ALT.*.*.EROTICA HIERARCHY
Message-ID:
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 21:58:00 GMT
[A repost - Carl]
From caf-talk Caf Nov 18 17:09:33 1992
From: M. Stuart Lynn
Subject: ALERT RE POSTINGS AND CORNELL ACCESS TO ALT.*.*.EROTICA HIERARCHY
Message-ID: <1992Nov18.202832.1951@mail.cornell.edu>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 20:28:32 GMT
ALERT ON POSTINGS TO AND CORNELL ACTION REGARDING
ALT.BINARIES.PICTURES.EROTICA
It has come to my attention that certain pictures encoded as GIF files
are circulating on the NetNews newsgroup alt.binaries.pictures.erotica
(a.b.p.e) whose transmission may constitute violations of the United
States Code regarding sexual exploitation of minors, in particular
Section 2252. These pictures depict unclothed young children displayed in
a manner that could be construed as constituting sexually explicit
conduct as defined in the Code. Although some of these pictures may have
originated from outside of the United States, it is known that a number
of them have been re-distributed from sources within the United States.
One of these sources may have originated at Cornell, but there appear to
be other sources associated with other institutions. It also appears that
individuals from many institutions are explicily requesting copies of
these files.
Effective immediately, Cornell's official newstand will no longer provide
access to the a.b.p.e, hierarchy at least until we can ascertain that
there has been no violation of the law.
M. Stuart Lynn
Vice President for Information Technologies
--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
From caf-talk Caf Nov 18 17:09:35 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 u
Message-ID:
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 22:01:24 GMT
[A repost - Carl]
From caf-talk Caf Nov 18 17:09:35 1992
From: cmeadows@nyx.cs.du.edu (Chris Meadows)
Subject: Re: Query: Can Universities limit network access &/or 'spy` on u
Message-ID: <1992Nov18.073637.22768@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 92 07:36:37 GMT
On a similar topic, I think that my university is the most anal-
retentive regarding its computers of any university on the planet.
I go to Southwest Missouri State University, in Springfield, and I
have heard rumors that students will no longer be able to get Inter-
net access next semester. Others have said that Internet is just being
removed from another machine, and I'm not sure what to believe.
One of my friends was recently ordered by the head of some computer
department to unsubscribe to a list server he was using, because "stu-
dents never sign off of the list servers at the end of the semester."
And he was actually using it for ACADEMIC purposes (and I subscribe
to two servers, I could be next!).
Our school DOES have a few problems with Internet, the main one being
people who ftp 5 or 6 megabyte files at peak hours. They seem to
think that the simplest way to solve all this would be to cut stu-
dents off from Internet entirely. Seems like amputating your arm
to be rid of a gangrenous finger to me.
They also don't like MUCKing--they don't consider it a "serious use
of computer resources." But MUCKing is not putting an appreciable
strain on SMSU resources; I think they're just coming down on it
because they don't understand it.
I had thought that when an educational organization such as SMSU
signed onto Internet, one of the basic tenets was that they had to
give any student instant access. But as it stands now, we have to
get a sponsor's signature before we can get onto the mainframe with
Internet access. And it's a very lousy mainframe, too.
Is there anything I can do about this?
--
Chris Meadows // CHM173S@SMSVMA // CMEADOWS@NYX.CS.DU.EDU
"If blood be the price of admiralty, then I've just bought me
a naval commission." -- Corwin, SIGN OF THE UNICORN, Roger Zelazny
--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
From caf-talk Caf Nov 18 17:09:36 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 u
Message-ID:
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 22:01:38 GMT
[A repost - Carl]
From caf-talk Caf Nov 18 17:09:36 1992
From: john@iastate.edu (John Hascall)
Subject: Re: Query: Can Universities limit network access &/or 'spy` on u
Message-ID:
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 18:04:32 GMT
cmeadows@nyx.cs.du.edu (Chris Meadows) writes:
}On a similar topic, I think that my university is the most anal-
}retentive regarding its computers of any university on the planet.
}I go to Southwest Missouri State University, in Springfield, and I have
}heard rumors that students will no longer be able to get Internet access...
}Is there anything I can do about this?
transfer?
(That's not as flip as it sounds) When students start asking the admissions
office questions like:
Do you have `T1' or better access to Internet?
Do all students get Internet access? Under what limits?
Do all students get usernames? On what kind of systems? Limits?
then the university will start realizing the importance of such facilities
-- hopefully the day will come when these questions stop getting asked, I
mean nobody asks:
Do you have running water? Electricity? Indoor plumbing?
anymore (at least in up here in Iowa ;-)
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
--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
From caf-talk Caf Nov 18 17:26:43 1992
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: Re: Query: Can Universities limit network access &/or 'spy` on u
Message-ID:
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 22:14:06 GMT
cmeadows@nyx.cs.du.edu (Chris Meadows) writes:
>On a similar topic, I think that my university is the most anal-
>retentive regarding its computers of any university on the planet.
[...]
I think a university should strive to offer the best information
resources and forums to the whole university community. This should
include good libraries, a vigorous student press, and good computer
and network facilities.
Having said that, I note this goal is never completely reached. For
example, here at U. of Illinois, most undergrads are not allowed in
the main library stacks. If they know what book they want, they have
to request it at the Stacks desk and then wait (and wait) for it to be
retrieved.
However, even with limited resources there are wise and less than wise
ways to allocate resources. One thing you might try is to increase the
amount of faculty and student participation in the allocation process.
- Carl
--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
From caf-talk Caf Nov 18 17:43:30 1992
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: Re: right to have .plan
Message-ID:
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 22:26:27 GMT
baldwin@csservera.scs.usna.navy.mil (J.D. Baldwin) writes:
[...]
>However, it is far from clear that such decisions would preclude
>something which is clearly personal expression on a machine at that
>level.
[...]
Universities are not automatically required to allow personal
experssion in .plans. But if they do (most seem to), they are legally
required to be evenhanded and consistent about what they allow.
>That said, how long do you think a "personal" expression of some
>really vile racist statement would last in such a forum? (Both as an
>abstract legal issue and as a practical matter.)
Legally, forever. Practically, they would might ban all .plans. But,
then again, they might not. At Boston U. a private university, someone
but some ICE-T lyrics in his .plan. There were complaints, but the
lyrics are still there.
> None of the (rather
>impressive) "annotated references" you provided seem to indicate that
>a university computer's managers are merely providing a "common
>carrier" for expression. I can see where they might still have an
>interest in suppressing certain categories of speech.
[...]
"Common carrier" is perhaps the wrong term. I think a better term is
"public forum". I'm enclosing a pointer to a court decision that
describes the public forum doctrine.
- Carl
ANNOTATED REFERENCES
(All these documents are available on-line. Access information follows.)
=================
news/cafv02n38: Message-Id:
=================
An article from the Computers and Academic Freedom News 02.38
Notes 7-8 are about .plan files that might offend.
7. "I recently put the lyrics to "Cop Killer" by Ice-T in my .plan file so
that it shows up when someone else does "finger jbw@cs.bu.edu".
Two people have complained to my department's chair... .He asked
me informally to remove it. I told him I would not do so voluntarily."
=================
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/news/cafv02n38
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/news cafv02n38
send acad-freedom/law san-diego-committee-v-gov-bd
--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
From caf-talk Caf Nov 18 23:36:33 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [news.admin.misc] Re: ALERT RE POSTINGS AND CORNELL ACCESS TO ALT.*.*.EROTICA HIERARCHY
Message-ID:
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 04:07:44 GMT
[A repost - Carl]
From caf-talk Caf Nov 18 23:36:33 1992
From: dan@cubmol.bio.columbia.edu (Daniel Zabetakis)
Subject: Re: ALERT RE POSTINGS AND CORNELL ACCESS TO ALT.*.*.EROTICA HIERARCHY
Message-ID: <1992Nov18.211845.8278@news.columbia.edu>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 21:18:45 GMT
In article <1992Nov18.202832.1951@mail.cornell.edu> M. Stuart Lynn writes:
>ALERT ON POSTINGS TO AND CORNELL ACTION REGARDING
>ALT.BINARIES.PICTURES.EROTICA
>
First of all, is this a joke? A forgery? Or do you just like sounding
like a paranoid fool in public?
>It has come to my attention that certain pictures encoded as GIF files
>are circulating on the NetNews newsgroup alt.binaries.pictures.erotica
>(a.b.p.e) whose transmission may constitute violations of the United
>States Code regarding sexual exploitation of minors, in particular
>Section 2252. These pictures depict unclothed young children displayed in
>a manner that could be construed as constituting sexually explicit
>conduct as defined in the Code.
What articles specifically are you refering to? I have asked over and
over and over for real examples, and none have been forthcoming. I personally
have seen no images that could be construed as you describe. I don't claim
to have seen everything posted to that group.
>Effective immediately, Cornell's official newstand will no longer provide
>access to the a.b.p.e, hierarchy at least until we can ascertain that
>there has been no violation of the law.
>
Do you apply this standard to your bookstore, or your library? Wow,
academic freedom in action. Zow!
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.
--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
From caf-talk Caf Nov 19 00:25:25 1992
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,comp.org.acm,alt.privacy,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,alt.society.civil-liberty
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: On-line Proceedings for "Computers, Freedom and Privacy II"
Message-ID:
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 05:03:50 GMT
The database contains the ASCII text of the proceedings from "the
Conference on Computers, Freedom and Privacy II," courtesy of the ACM.
The proceedings has 11 sections:
1. KEYNOTE ADDRESS: Freedom in Cyberspace: New Wine in Old
2. WHO LOGS ON?
3. ETHICS, MORALITY, AND CRIMINALITY
4. FOR SALE: GOVERNMENT INFORMATION
5. FREE SPEECH AND THE PUBLIC TELEPHONE NETWORK
6. WHO'S IN YOUR GENES?
7. PRIVATE COLLECTION OF PERSONAL INFORMATION
8. PRIVACY AND INTELLECTUAL FREEDOM IN THE DIGITAL LIBRARY
9. COMPUTERS IN THE WORKPLACE: ELYSIUM or PANOPTICON?
10. WHO HOLDS THE KEYS?
11. PUBLIC POLICY FOR THE 21st CENTURY
It is available via WAIS, an internet tool. The "*.scr" file is
enclosed. If you don't have wais, but do have telnet, you can
telnet quake.think.com
and sign on as "wais" and run WAIS there. The database is about source
106. Searching for the word "computer" will produce a list
of all 11 sections.
- Carl
========== computers-freedom-and-privacy.scr ================
(:source
:version 3
:ip-address "192.31.181.1"
:ip-name "quake.think.com"
:tcp-port 210
:database-name "/proj/wais/db/sources/computers-freedom-and-privacy"
:cost 0.00
:cost-unit :free
:maintainer "jonathan@think.com"
:description "Server created with WAIS release 8 b6 on Nov 16 13:40:50 1992 by jonathan@quake
This database contains the ASCII text of the proceedings from \"the
Conference on Computers, Freedom and Privacy II,\" courtesy of the ACM.
The proceedings has 11 sections:
1. KEYNOTE ADDRESS: Freedom in Cyberspace: New Wine in Old
2. WHO LOGS ON?
3. ETHICS, MORALITY, AND CRIMINALITY
4. FOR SALE: GOVERNMENT INFORMATION
5. FREE SPEECH AND THE PUBLIC TELEPHONE NETWORK
6. WHO'S IN YOUR GENES?
7. PRIVATE COLLECTION OF PERSONAL INFORMATION
8. PRIVACY AND INTELLECTUAL FREEDOM IN THE DIGITAL LIBRARY
9. COMPUTERS IN THE WORKPLACE: ELYSIUM or PANOPTICON?
10. WHO HOLDS THE KEYS?
11. PUBLIC POLICY FOR THE 21st CENTURY
"
)
--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
From caf-talk Caf Nov 19 05:49:08 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,news.admin.misc,news.config
From: evansmp@uhura.aston.ac.uk (Mark Evans)
Subject: Re: [news.admin.misc, et al.] ALERT RE POSTINGS AND CORNELL ACCESS TO ALT.*.*.EROTICA HIERARCHY
Message-ID: <1992Nov19.102029.23140@aston.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 10:20:29 GMT
Carl M. Kadie (kadie@cs.uiuc.edu) wrote:
: [A repost - Carl]
:
: Newsgroups: news.admin.misc,news.config
: From: M. Stuart Lynn
: Subject: ALERT RE POSTINGS AND CORNELL ACCESS TO ALT.*.*.EROTICA HIERARCHY
: Message-ID: <1992Nov18.202832.1951@mail.cornell.edu>
: Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 20:28:32 GMT
:
: ALERT ON POSTINGS TO AND CORNELL ACTION REGARDING
: ALT.BINARIES.PICTURES.EROTICA
:
: It has come to my attention that certain pictures encoded as GIF files
: are circulating on the NetNews newsgroup alt.binaries.pictures.erotica
: (a.b.p.e) whose transmission may constitute violations of the United
: States Code regarding sexual exploitation of minors, in particular
: Section 2252. These pictures depict unclothed young children displayed in
: a manner that could be construed as constituting sexually explicit
: conduct as defined in the Code. Although some of these pictures may have
: originated from outside of the United States, it is known that a number
: of them have been re-distributed from sources within the United States.
:
: One of these sources may have originated at Cornell, but there appear to
: be other sources associated with other institutions. It also appears that
: individuals from many institutions are explicily requesting copies of
: these files.
:
: Effective immediately, Cornell's official newstand will no longer provide
: access to the a.b.p.e, hierarchy at least until we can ascertain that
: there has been no violation of the law.
A point a big fuss was made about 2 years ago about kiddie porn
on the net.
These turned out to be pictures scanned from a japanese magazine
featuring models dressed in school uniform type clothes.
These models appeared to be under 18 to americans, when in fact they
were women dressed and attempting to be children.
:
: M. Stuart Lynn
: Vice President for Information Technologies
: --
: Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Evans |evansmp@uhura.aston.ac.uk
+(44) 21 429 9199 (Home) |evansmp@cs.aston.ac.uk
+(44) 21 359 6531 x4039 (Office) |
From caf-talk Caf Nov 19 16:30:38 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [alt.censorship] Sex Censorship
Message-ID:
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 21:12:57 GMT
[A repost - Carl]
From caf-talk Caf Nov 19 16:30:38 1992
Newsgroups: alt.censorship
Subject: Sex Censorship
Date: 19 Nov 92 06:28:28 GMT
Message-ID:
Recently all sex-related newsgroups have been banned from the usenet here
at the University of British Columbia. I'm new to the usenet/internet
(I'm still not sure what each of these is), so I don't have any idea what
these newsgroups are called or what was on them. Those responsible for
banning them (primarily the president's office) mentioned things like evil
lewd stories of rape and pillage, and people ogling animated porn on the
their computers at the office making female coworkers nearby
uncomfortable. How much of this ever really happened or existed is
anyone's guess. The language the administration, and particularly
university President David Strangway, used in justifying this was really
colourful, foaming at the mouth stuff, referring to a poison pervading the
university's community, corrupting and rotting moral fibre, and other
Strangelovesque phrases.
So now we can't even see these newsgroups listed when we ask for an
overview of available newsgroups. Punching in a keyword like "sex" to
search for results in nothing. It's like sex never existed on the internet.
What I'm wondering is this: Are these newsgroups really so evil and
dangerous? Are there no reasonable, progressive discussions of matters
sexual in them, or anywhere in the entire newsnet? Have any other
institutions taken this step? Would they even be able to in the U.S.
without transgressing constitutional guarantees of free speech, or is this
just one of the virtues of living in clean asexual Canada? Am I wrong to
be just a teensy bit outraged by this?
Derrick Pohl
apohl@unixg.ubc.ca
Sorry, no cute ASCII pix or moving sentiments at this time.....
--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
From caf-talk Caf Nov 19 18:17:44 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [sci.virtual-worlds] PHIL: Virtual Communities & Rights
Message-ID:
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 23:08:44 GMT
[A repost - Carl]
From caf-talk Caf Nov 19 18:17:44 1992
From: Rick.Horowitz@lambada.oit.unc.edu (Rick Horowitz)
Subject: PHIL: Virtual Communities & Rights
Message-ID: <1992Nov19.072114.2593@u.washington.edu>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 14:26:30 GMT
Because the computer services department at our "university" has
decided that they may, with impunity, read student e-mail, go through
student files, block students from their accounts if they (computer
services) don't understand something the student is doing,
forcing the student to spend usually about one full day discovering
they can't get into their account, then going to UCS (university
computer services) to explain that they didn't do anything out of the
ordinary, etc., before they can get their privileges restored, which
privileges in most cases ARE restored when UCS realizes the student
hasn't done anything wrong, and because I'm a philosophy major now
forcibly thrust into the arena, I'd like to write a paper as a way of
working things out regarding thoughts on Ethics in Virtual
Communities.
Part of my feeling is summed up simply by saying that virtual
communities are no different than so-called real communities...they
just don't allow "face-to-face" contact of physical bodies.
Nevertheless, "personalities", and analogs for "towns", "states", or
whatever, seem to be socially-constituted in virtual realities just as
they appear to be in the so-called "real world." Further, all rights,
privileges, and responsibilities persons in "real worlds" have, they
have in virtual worlds, also.
I have written, in response to a draconian policy statement which came
out recently, that
I note that there is really nothing in the UCS policy (a copy of which
I was sent) which directly addresses the rights of the users of the
system. Apparently the university still does not understand that
whether they own the system or not, the mere existence of the system,
along with the fact that a significant group of users like ourselves
are given access creates a de facto virtual community. With respect
to virtual communities instantiated on systems located in the United
States, persons in those virtual communities should have all the same
rights under the Constitution of the United States as persons in
(actual) physical communities. This is especially true if one
considers what Mary Hawkesworth calls 'socialized individualism' as
opposed to the view favored by UCS personnel, Republicans and other
fascistic folks who fail to understand how communities are constituted,
which is known as 'atomistic individualism.' The fact that the
university owns the system is no more justification for the
establishment of a community of rights-less individuals than the fact
that landlords own apartment buildings which they magnanimously rent
to poverty-striken tenants justifies making those tenants rights-less.
The fact that a farmer may own the land on which sie employs migrant
workers who then may also rent housing on that land from hir similarly
does not justify the maintenance of feudal systems.
Although I don't imagine I will ever run afoul of the University
guidelines for security, obscenity, etc., so I don't think I would
ever create a security risk, the way the current policy is written,
this will not ensure that my mail and files will not be invaded by superusers
who have taken it upon themselves to abrogate any rights I may have as
a citizen of the United States of America, in which country the
physical systems which instantiate the virtual communities through
which I move exist, and thus will not ensure that, without due process,
they will not violate specifically my rights to privacy.
In the founding of that great virtual system known as the United
States of America, the Constitution faced a formidable challenge
before attaining ratification: it had no Bill of Rights. The very
same fear that we have as citizens of de facto virtual communities was
present to would-be citizens of actual geographical regions that would
be administered by the to-be-established (aforementioned) virtual
system. Just as those individuals, so we live (part of) our lives in
virtual space ("the system," "the net" vs that other virtual space
"the United States of America") which is located in a physical domain
(the Computer vs, e.g. the North American continent) administered by
individuals who have an obligation to recognize that we have certain
inalienable rights, which rights include the pursuit of life, liberty,
and happiness.
UCS has already seen fit to make it their job to deprive us of
happiness, through the non-establishment (and occasional
DISestablishment) of certain services required for the smooth
functioning of our research projects. Additionally, whereas the
founders of our country would have been forced to track us
down and arrest us to deprive us of our liberty, UCS only needs to
close our gateway to the net; whereas the founders of our country
would have been forced to track us down and hang us to deprive us of
our right to life, UCS needs only to change our passwords. It is thus
incumbent upon UCS to take the appropriate steps to more clearly
delineate our rights, and their responsibilities, in order to ensure
that we live to (virtual) ripe old ages, complete many research
projects, write many papers, and thus hopefully obtain tenure, or
whatever else it is which we have ventured onto this frontier to
attain.
So much for what I've already thought of/said.
So, as part of the background for a more developed paper, I'd like to
read as much as I can about sociological and/or philosophical writing
about virtual communities, or anything else which might seem useful to
my project (like stuff on the social constitution of selves, a la
Burkitt). I know that there have been dissertations done on the topic
of virtual communities, and even ftp'd one once, but I can't find it
now and don't remember how to get it.
If anyone can help me with this, or make other suggestions, please
e-mail me at "rhorowit@mondrian.csufresno.edu".
Thanks very much in advance for reading this and for any help you can
provide.
Rick Horowitz CSUF, Philosophy rhorowit@mondrian.csufresno.edu
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
The word "politics" is derived from the word "poly", meaning
"many", and the word "ticks", meaning "blood sucking parasites".
--
The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
internet: laUNChpad.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
From caf-talk Caf Nov 19 23:25:47 1992
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: greeny@eff.org (J S Greenfield)
Subject: Re: right to have .plan
Message-ID: <1992Nov20.042540.7446@eff.org>
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 04:25:40 GMT
In article kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
>
>Universities are not automatically required to allow personal
>experssion in .plans. But if they do (most seem to), they are legally
>required to be evenhanded and consistent about what they allow.
I missed the original article, so perhaps I'm taking this out of context,
but it looks as though you left out the "Public" before "Universities"
in the above.
Barring any contractual obligations from a private school's own regulations,
I'm not aware of any such legal obligations on the part of private
universities.
--
J. S. Greenfield greeny@top.cis.syr.edu
(I like to put 'greeny' here, greeny@eff.org
but my d*mn system wants a
*real* name!) "What's the difference between an orange?"
From caf-talk Caf Nov 19 23:42:17 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,news.admin.misc
From: greeny@eff.org (J S Greenfield)
Subject: Re: [news.admin.misc] Re: ALERT RE POSTINGS AND CORNELL ACCESS TO ALT.*.*.EROTICA HIERARCHY
Message-ID: <1992Nov20.044211.7776@eff.org>
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 04:42:11 GMT
dan@cubmol.bio.columbia.edu (Daniel Zabetakis) writes:
>>ALERT ON POSTINGS TO AND CORNELL ACTION REGARDING
>>ALT.BINARIES.PICTURES.EROTICA
>>
> First of all, is this a joke? A forgery? Or do you just like sounding
>like a paranoid fool in public?
I seem to recall from last year (when a Mac virus was released by some
Cornell students) that a number of (other) Cornell students complained
that Mr. Lynn had a tremendous tendency to overeact...
>>It has come to my attention that certain pictures encoded as GIF files
>>are circulating on the NetNews newsgroup alt.binaries.pictures.erotica
>>(a.b.p.e) whose transmission may constitute violations of the United
>>States Code regarding sexual exploitation of minors, in particular
>>Section 2252. These pictures depict unclothed young children displayed in
>>a manner that could be construed as constituting sexually explicit
>>conduct as defined in the Code.
>
> What articles specifically are you refering to? I have asked over and
>over and over for real examples, and none have been forthcoming. I personally
>have seen no images that could be construed as you describe. I don't claim
>to have seen everything posted to that group.
Well, there have certainly been a number of photographs depicting nude girls;
however, most of them have not provoked complaints of "child pornography."
One gif, entitled "RUKO.GIF" has produced many such charges, however.
Based upon a summary of the US child pornography standards, it is plausible
to me that "RUKO.GIF" could be found to constitute "child pornography."
(That particular picture included a close-up of the child's genitalia.)
evansmp@uhura.aston.ac.uk (Mark Evans) writes:
>A point a big fuss was made about 2 years ago about kiddie porn
>on the net.
>These turned out to be pictures scanned from a japanese magazine
>featuring models dressed in school uniform type clothes.
>These models appeared to be under 18 to americans, when in fact they
>were women dressed and attempting to be children.
There have, however, been pictures posted that certainly were of *children*
(though may not have been "child pornography" as defined by US law).
I would guess that the girl in RUKO.GIF was closer to 8 than to 18.
--
J. S. Greenfield greeny@top.cis.syr.edu
(I like to put 'greeny' here, greeny@eff.org
but my d*mn system wants a
*real* name!) "What's the difference between an orange?"
From caf-talk Caf Nov 20 13:17:21 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: escheire@sunlab.cit.cornell.edu (Eric Scheirer)
Subject: The FBI takes a trip to Cornell...
Message-ID: <9211201816.AA21284@dahlia.cit.cornell.edu>
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 08:16:55 GMT
>>> ALERT ON POSTINGS TO AND CORNELL ACTION REGARDING
>>> ALT.BINARIES.PICTURES.EROTICA
>>
>> First of all, is this a joke? A forgery? Or do you just like sounding
>> like a paranoid fool in public?
>
>I seem to recall from last year (when a Mac virus was released by some
>Cornell students) that a number of (other) Cornell students complained
>that Mr. Lynn had a tremendous tendency to overeact...
Well, now we know what this is all about...
Taken without permission from the _Cornell Daily Sun_ of 20 November:
--
FBI SEARCHES STUDENT'S ROOM FOR PORNOGRAPHY
By J. Allison Archbold
The FBI search of a Cornell sophomore's residence hall room Wednesday
was the first stage of an investigation into the alleged distribution
of child pornography via an international computer network.
Federal officials said they were investigating whether the student used
an electronic scanner to transmit child pornography onto a computer file
and send the pictures through an international computer bulletin board.
According to Roger Clancy, a supervisory special agent in the FBI's
Albany division, the agents executed the search warrant, supported by a
sealed affidavit.
While the contents of the affidavit were not revealed, federal
officials said the warrant authorized agents to search for possession
of child pornography and evidence of interstate transport by computer
of child pornography.
Several residents of Clara Dickson Hall said five or six FBI agents
took photographs of Dickson room 5593, dusted for fingerprints, and
rummaged through the resident's belongings, confiscating several items
during the two-hour search Wednesday afternoon.
Clancy would not disclose what was seized or whether other Cornell
students were involved. He said agents are currently focusing on
sifting through the items confiscated during the search.
Clancy emphasized that the government was only just beginning the
investigation and added that any arrests from the case would not
come for several weeks or months.
"Generally speaking, our office and the Department of Justice take an
aggressive approach to child pornography investigation," said Joe
Pavone, the chief assistant U.S. attorney for the Northern District of
New York, which ordered the investigation.
Marjorie W. Hodges J.D. '91, judicial administrator, said her office is
pursuing its own investigation. The student may have violated a Campus
Code of Conduct status that forbids "trafficking, for profit or
otherwise, in goods and services, when incompatible with the interest
of the University and the Cornell community." She would not comment
any further on the case.
According to Linda Grace-Kobas, a University spokesperson, Cornell was
first informed of the alleged illegal activity on Nov. 11 by an
administrator of another computer network who suspected that a student
might be transmitting "material involving the sexual exploitation of
minors." Due to the nature of the alleged crimes, the University
notified the U.S. Attorney.
Cornell has since discontinued access to the `NetNews newsgroup'
(alt.binaries.pictures.erotica) which was used for the distribution of
the material.
Investigator Scott C. Hamilton of the Department of Public Safety
said his office was collaborating in the investigation, acting as a
liaison between the federal agents and the University. Although he
was present during the room search, he would not comment further on
the case.
----
Eric Scheirer - Sun Undergrad Lab Consultant - escheire@sunlab.cit.cornell.edu
Any opinions expressed above are mine alone, and are not intended to
represent views of the Cornell CS Dept, or Cornell Information Technologies --
I don't even work for CIT!
From caf-talk Caf Nov 20 13:20:36 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,news.admin.misc
From: dan@cubmol.bio.columbia.edu (Daniel Zabetakis)
Subject: Re: [news.admin.misc] Re: ALERT RE POSTINGS AND CORNELL ACCESS TO ALT.*.*.EROTICA HIERARCHY
Message-ID: <1992Nov20.165220.2446@news.columbia.edu>
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 16:52:20 GMT
In article <1992Nov20.044211.7776@eff.org> greeny@eff.org (J S Greenfield) writes:
>
>Based upon a summary of the US child pornography standards, it is plausible
>to me that "RUKO.GIF" could be found to constitute "child pornography."
>(That particular picture included a close-up of the child's genitalia.)
>
Perhaps, but only by a gross misinterpretation of the law. RUKO.GIF can
only be pornographic if _all_ nudity is pornographic. The MA law that
stated this was overturned.
The picture is very obviously one of those art-photo's that I particularly
hate. But there is no erotic content, and the posting drew complaints that
it shouldn't have been posted to a group with 'erotica' in the name. Posting
it to alt.b.p.misc wouold have been better, IMHO (which doesn't go far in
a.b.p.m).
The picture didn't show a closup of any genitals, BTW. The girl was standing
with her legs together. You could see a fold of skin in which her genitals
would be located.
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 20 15:36:52 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: escheire@sunlab.cit.cornell.edu (Eric Scheirer)
Subject: Re: The FBI takes a trip to Cornell...
Message-ID: <9211202036.AA12053@crocus.cit.cornell.edu>
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 10:34:57 GMT
Here are some thoughts I have on this...
First, I think that the action taken by Cornell regarding Usenet in general
was refreshingly slight. It would have been all-too-easy to restrict access
to the whole alt hierarchy, or even all of Usenet, during the "interim"
period during which investigations are occurring.
Also, note that this is NOT, as yet anyway, a computer abuse case. It is
strictly a felony investigation, and possible related Cornell investigation
(see below).
Some comments from around campus seem to indicate that the student population
thinks that such an investigation is "too harsh". I think that what the
FBI is concerned about, and rightly so in my view, is the possibility that
the student, or people connected to the student in some way, were the
people behind the camera for the photography.
I think that the charge of _being the one with the scanner_ is much more
serious that one of just downloading and/or viewing the pictures. It's
the difference between "trafficking" or "transporting" and "possessing",
IMHO.
Criticisms I have:
> Marjorie W. Hodges J.D. '91, judicial administrator, said her office is
> pursuing its own investigation. The student may have violated a Campus
> Code of Conduct status that forbids "trafficking, for profit or
> otherwise, in goods and services, when incompatible with the interest
> of the University and the Cornell community." She would not comment
> any further on the case.
This is Section J of Article II of Title 3 of the Cornell Code of Conduct.
It is far, far, far too vague. Further, Article II of Title 1 seems to
exclude the possibility of simultaneous University and criminal action.
In part:
A. The following basic principles and policies will apply in
situations where misconduct violates both the law and University
conduct regulations:
1. The following kinds of offenses are adjudicated in the courts:
all felonies...
2. When the University Administration determines that other misconduct
does not constitute a serious breach of the law, and that the
interests of justice would be served, it shall seek to handle such
misconduct within the University jurisdiction...
4. Policies covering conduct that violates both the law and University
regulations, where feasible, should be based on jurisdictional
understandings and procedures jointly developed and periodically
reviewed by University and local officials. To the maximum extent
feasible, jurisdictional understandings shall be made known to the
Cornell community.
As far as I know, there has been no such "jurisdictional understanding"
developed for these issues.
---
Interested parties who want to peruse the Cornell Code of Conduct can
get at it via internet, on the CUINFO information service. Do
"telnet cornellc.cit.cornell.edu 300"
on Unix systems, or the equivalent for specifying port 300 on others.
Once in CUINFO, type "admin government code" to get there. You can do
it all on separate lines if you like; CUINFO is a hierarchical menu
system.
All of the other pertinant Cornell documents, such as the Computer Abuse
Policy, are also available "nearby" the CCC.
----
Eric Scheirer - Sun Undergrad Lab Consultant - escheire@sunlab.cit.cornell.edu
Any opinions expressed above are mine alone, and are not intended to
represent views of the Cornell CS Dept, or Cornell Information Technologies --
I don't even work for CIT!
From caf-talk Caf Nov 20 22:23:24 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,comp.org.eff.talk
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [misc.legal] My Job (Was Re: Actual lawyers on this group?)
Message-ID:
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 02:59:48 GMT
[A repost - Carl]
From caf-talk Caf Nov 20 22:23:24 1992
From: mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin)
Subject: My Job (Was Re: Actual lawyers on this group?)
Message-ID: <1992Nov20.230421.21171@eff.org>
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 23:04:21 GMT
In article <1992Nov13.220225.9737@hellgate.utah.edu> tolman%asylum.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Kenneth Tolman) writes:
> I am considering practicing law, and would like to hear actual unfiltered
>comments from lawyers in the ditches. Do you like your job? Why/not?
I like it, and rather than simply tell you why, I'll repost here an
article describing the legal services I provide as part of my job (the
other parts of my work include writing and speaking for EFF).
EFF LEGAL SERVICES, by Mike Godwin, EFF Staff Counsel, Cambridge
Because EFF has spent the last year developing and publicizing our
policy-focused efforts at our new Washington office, many of our
constituents have wondered whether EFF is still active on the
civil-liberties front. The answer to that question is an unqualified
"Yes!" This activity has been less well-publicized, however, often because
of the privacy interests of most of the people who seek EFF help with
their individual cases. I want to take this opportunity to let our members
and constituents know what kind of legal services we offer, and what kind
of casework we do.
The primary legal services I provide are basic counselling and
referrals. EFF does not charge for this, and you do not have to be an EFF
member to call or write and ask for help. I answer general questions about
computer law and telecommunications law at the federal level as well as in
the jurisdictions in which I am admitted to the bar (currently Texas and
Washington, D.C.). When appropriate, I instruct people to seek further
consultation with lawyers in their respective jurisdictions, giving them
referrals to specific lawyers when possible. (EFF maintains a database of
attorneys who've volunteered to do some kinds of work on these kinds of
cases.) I often mail out source materials to individuals and
organizations. (One of the most frequently requested materials is the
original complaint filed by Steve Jackson Games in its lawsuit against the
U.S. government--many lawyers find that the complaint is a good primer on
civil-liberties issues raised by the search and seizure of a computer
bulletin-board system.) More frequently, I talk to people on the
telephone. The kinds of questions I deal with tend to fall into the
following three general areas:
General questions about legal issues. A caller may be a sysop who's
been told by someone that it's against the law to read users' e-mail, and
she wants to know whether this is true. Or it may be a user who wants to
know if it's legal to upload a scanned image of a copyrighted photograph
to a BBS for downloading by other users. Or it may be a hobbyist
programmer who wonders if he may be held liable if a computer virus he
writes somehow "escapes" and infects and damages other systems. Usually
these questions are aimed at *anticipated* legal risks (the caller wants
to know ahead of time if her actions will lead to legal trouble), but a
significant number of the calls are from people who wonder if their
*current* activities are illegal or create risks of legal liability. For
example, a lot of sysops of "pirate" BBSs have acquired the notion that
they can't be held liable for providing access to unauthorized copies of
commercial software because it's "the guy downloading the stuff who's
doing the copying"--I tell them they are mistaken and point out the legal
risks of providing such access. A small but consistent fraction of callers
prefer to remain anonymous. I respect their wishes, and try to give just
as much help to anonymous callers as to those who identify themselves.
Requests for help in criminal cases. Basically, these types of
requests fall into two categories, which I call "target cases" and
"non-target cases" :
A "target case" is one in which the request is from someone (the
"target") who is very likely to become, or who has already become, a
defendant in a state or federal case. I may get the request from the
target personally, or I may get a call from the target's lawyer. (If the
target doesn't have a lawyer, my first priority is to do what I can to
help him get one. Although EFF does not normally provide funds for legal
representation in criminal cases, I can tell a caller how to go about
contacting a private defense lawyer or a public defender.) I'll ask the
caller for basic facts about the case, and, once I'm in contact with his
lawyer, I'll do what I can to help the lawyer learn the relevant law and
gather the necessary facts to prepare the case. Even the very best defense
lawyers are likely to be unfamiliar with the legal and evidentiary issues
raised by computer-crime investigations--I'm often able to give them a
running start on their case preparation. On a few occasions, a case may
raise a particularly unusual and important civil-liberties issue, and I'll
make a recommendation to EFF management as to whether EFF should formally
support the case in some way.
A "non-target case" is one in which the person asking for
assistance or advice is not an actual or prospective defendant, but her
rights or interests have somehow been affected by a criminal investigation
or by the actions of law-enforcement officials. (The classic example is
one in which a non-target sysop's BBS or networked computer has been
seized as part of an investigation of one the system's users.) As in
target cases, I may advise her lawyer, but I often can resolve things
quickly by acting directly as a representative for the person asking for
help. For example, in a recent Washington State case, I helped a
non-target negotiate a quick return of his equipment, which federal agents
had seized and searched as part of a multi-state criminal investigation.
Requests for help in civil cases. Normally, EFF won't take sides in
a civil case unless it clearly raises an important civil-liberties issue.
One such case involved the manufacturers of a VCR-programming device who
threatened to sue individuals participating in a discussion of their
coding algorithms on the Usenet newsgroup sci.crypt. The company's lawyer
insisted that the Usenetters' efforts at figuring out the algorithms by
deducing them from the codes published in TV Guide listings and elsewhere
was a violation of their copyright, patent, and trade-secret interests. I
researched their claim and confirmed the Usenet posters' belief that their
research did not violate any intellectual-property protections of the
manufacturers' products, and I represented their position to the
manufacturer, telling the company that the posters were engaged in
Constitutionally protected speech and inquiry. After several convesations
between me and the company's lawyer, the company dropped its claims. (The
sci.crypt posters' research was eventually published as a paper in the
journal CRYPTOLOGIA--Vol. XVI, Number 3, July 1992--in which the authors
thanked EFF for their legal assistance.)
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. (I've explained to more than one system administrator
that mere possession of such information does not make one a computer
intruder, and that their rummaging may have violated the students'
rights.) Or a university computer center may decide to suspend some kinds
of Usenet newsgroups, justifying their actions by saying they're afraid
the sexually oriented newsgroups are illegal. (I've written and spoken to
university administrators to explain that virtually none of the
discussions in the sexually oriented newsgroups on Usenet qualify legally
as "obscenity"--instead, they're protected expression under established
American Constitutional law.) Or a group of sysops may be concerned about
their local phone company's efforts to impose business rates on nonprofit
BBS phone lines. (I now refer most such calls to Shari Steele,
ssteele@eff.org, the staff counsel of EFF's Washington office, who has
given special study to these issues.)
In addition to individual casework: I have represented EFF's legal
services primarily on three forums--the WELL, Usenet, and CompuServe. As a
result of my presence there, I have been receiving an increasing amount of
casework, requests for legal advice, and invitations to speak. The number
of these cases has increased in response to my presence online--it also
has increased in response to my public appearances. After the Second
Computers, Freedom, and Privacy conference, for example, I had three or
four cases referred to me by people who met me in Washington.
It is important that EFF members and constituents recognize we are here
to help you solve individual problems as well as promote your interests on
general policy issues. 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.
--
Mike Godwin, |"I can solve this Orient Express thing without
mnemonic@eff.org| breaking a sweat. It's that simple."
(617) 864-0665 |
EFF, Cambridge | --Hercule Perot
--
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent any organization; this is just me.
= kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
From caf-talk Caf Nov 20 23:03:02 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [news.admin, et al.] Re: Child porn posting investigated by FBI
Message-ID:
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 03:55:14 GMT
[A repost - Carl]
From caf-talk Caf Nov 20 23:03:02 1992
From: reed@snake.tc.cornell.edu (Michael G. Reed)
Subject: Re: Child porn posting investigated by FBI
Message-ID: <1992Nov21.021347.1158@tc.cornell.edu>
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 02:13:47 GMT
In article <1992Nov20.232602.9842@clarinet.com>, brad@clarinet.com (Brad Templeton) writes:
|> According to our story this morning from UPI (in clari.tw.computers) the
|> FBI is investigating the alleged posting of child porn to the net from
|> Cornell.
|>
|> The student in question's dorm room has been raided (!) but no charges have
|> been filed.
|>
|> Lovely.
Yes, and just like clockwork Cornell started to restrict the campus newsfeed.
No more a.b.p.e tree (not that I frequent the area, just found it interesting
when the newsgroups showed up missing....).
|> --
|> Brad Templeton, ClariNet Communications Corp. -- Sunnyvale, CA 408/296-0366
-Michael
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael G. Reed (reed@TC.Cornell.EDU)
Cornell National Supercomputing Facility
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why be normal, it's boring; and boring people should be shot.
Note: These are not the views of my employer (and probably not mine either).
--
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent any organization; this is just me.
= kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
From caf-talk Caf Nov 20 23:28:52 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [talk.abortion] Re: Larry Margolis contacts my sysadmin
Message-ID:
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 04:16:18 GMT
[A repost - Carl]
From caf-talk Caf Nov 20 23:28:52 1992
From: dsh@eceyv.ncsu.edu ( )
Subject: Re: Larry Margolis contacts my sysadmin
Message-ID: <1992Nov21.003516.21632@ncsu.edu>
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 00:35:16 GMT
In article
keegan@acm.rpi.edu (James G. Keegan Jr.) writes:
>dsh@eceyv.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
>> I'm glad you enjoyed my post to soc.singles, Mr. Margolis.
>> Despite your threatening e-mail to my sysadmin, I shall
>> continue to post to soc.singles.
> i'd like to see some proof of this allegation, unless
> it's just another lie, of course.
Here's the e-mail that Larry Margolis sent to my system
administrators, forwarded from one of the NCSU sysadmins.
I omitted the sender's address from the e-mail.
---begin included article---
[... sender's address deleted ...]
Status: R
id AA23666; Thu, 19 Nov 1992 13:12:32 -0500
Received-Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 13:12:32 -0500
Received: by post (5.57/SAM 12-13-90 16:56:22)
id AA00352; Fri, 20 Nov 92 10:11:15 -0500
Posted-Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 10:11:13 -0500 (EST)
Received: by sparcler.cc.ncsu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0)
id AA18896; Fri, 20 Nov 92 10:11:14 EST
Message-Id: <9211201511.AA18896@sparcler.cc.ncsu.edu>
Subject: Description of the Fetal Remains from an Abortion (fwd)
To: dsh@eceyv.ncsu.edu
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 10:11:13 -0500 (EST)
[... sender's address deleted ...]
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL2]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Length: 3129
Forwarded message:
>From margoli@watson.ibm.com Fri Nov 20 03:20:14 1992
Posted-Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 03:14:19
Received-Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 03:20:07 -0500
Message-Id: <9211201121.AA0081@The-Village.watson.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 03:14:19
From: margoli@watson.ibm.com (Larry Margolis)
Reply-To: margoli@watson.ibm.com
To: postmaster@ncsu.edu
Subject: Description of the Fetal Remains from an Abortion
To whom it may concern,
Apparently someone at your site is "letter-bombing" various newsgroups
with material previously posted to talk.abortion. This was in soc.singles,
alt.romance.chat, and other groups. I think someone needs a talking-to...
Sincerely,
Larry Margolis
>Newsgroups: soc.singles
>Path: yktnews!admin!newsgate.watson.ibm.com!uunet!stanford.edu!rock!taco!eceyv.ncsu.edu!dsh
>From: dsh@eceyv.ncsu.edu ( )
>Subject: Description of the Fetal Remains from an Abortion
>Message-ID: <1992Nov18.173151.4801@ncsu.edu>
>Sender: news@ncsu.edu (USENET News System)
>Organization: North Carolina State University
>References: <1992Nov15.210121.18247@bnlux1.bnl.gov> <74341@apple.apple.COM> <1992Nov17.224614.9193@bnlux1.bnl.gov>
>Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 17:31:51 GMT
>Lines: 34
>
> "It was easy to shrug off an aborted pregnancy as nothing more than
> a sack of blood and globs of tissue--as many pro-choice activists
> did--if one never saw fetal remains, or products of conception (POC),
> as they were known in medical circles. But the nurses, medical
> assistants, and doctors who worked inside procedure rooms knew
> that while an eight-week POC was indeed a sack of blood and
> globs of tissue, an eleven-week POC harbored tiny arms and legs
> and feet with toes. At twelve weeks, those tiny hands had tiny
> nails. Although the fetal head was too small at that stage to
> withstand the evacuation machine's suction, pieces of face--a nose
> and a mouth, or a black eye (all fetal eyes are black in the
> first trimester) the size of a pea--were sometimes found in
> the aftermath.
>
> Later abortions spawned even more gruesome fetal remains. Between
> the twelfth and the sixteenth week, early in the second trimester,
> the fetus almost doubled in length as its body caught up to its
> large head, and it filled out to the point where it looked like
> a human baby for the first time. Since the fetal skull was
> still soft, the head did not come out whole during the evacuation,
> but the legs and arms and rib cage made it through intact. The
> hand of a second trimester fetus, as a Preterm doctor described
> it, seemed big enough to shake.
>
> Most of Preterm's abortion staff didn't volunteer to work ``seconds''.
> Late first trimester POCs were hard enough. The counselor/medical
> assistants (CMAs) met regularly to discuss their feelings about
> their work, and often the discussion focused on the POC. Inside
> a procedure room, facing the contents of the uterus, there was
> no denying what abortion was."
>
> Sue Hertz, _Caught in the Crossfire: A Year on Abortion's Front Line_,
> Prentice Hall Press, 1991, pg. 104.
>
>
---end included post---
--
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent any organization; this is just me.
= kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
From caf-talk Caf Nov 20 23:28:53 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [talk.abortion] Re: Larry Margolis contacts my sysadmin
Message-ID:
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 04:16:22 GMT
[A repost - Carl]
From caf-talk Caf Nov 20 23:28:53 1992
From: margoli@watson.ibm.com (Larry Margolis)
Subject: Re: Larry Margolis contacts my sysadmin
Message-ID: <1992Nov21.030651.69140@watson.ibm.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 03:06:51 GMT
In <1992Nov21.003516.21632@ncsu.edu> dsh@eceyv.ncsu.edu ( ) writes:
>In article
>keegan@acm.rpi.edu (James G. Keegan Jr.) writes:
>>dsh@eceyv.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
>
>>> Despite your threatening e-mail to my sysadmin,
>
>> i'd like to see some proof of this allegation, unless
>> it's just another lie, of course.
>
>Here's the e-mail that Larry Margolis sent to my system
>administrators, forwarded from one of the NCSU sysadmins.
>I omitted the sender's address from the e-mail.
You also omitted your name. Any particular reason for that?
You were also posting from a different ID (dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu);
the first appearance of dsh@eceyv.ncsu.edu was in the anonymous
"letter-bombing". And that had names attached like "big tree", "Woody Allen",
or (as above) no name.
I just tried fingering, and your usual ID is still valid (in fact, you're
on it right now), while the dsh ID gave back:
Login name: dsh In real life:
Directory: /usr/users2/dsh Shell: /bin/csh
On since Nov 19 16:49:32 on ttyp2 from :0.0
8 hours 12 minutes Idle Time
No Plan.
So how was I supposed to know that dsh was the same lying weasel that
posts to talk.abortion as dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu? You didn't
start using the dsh ID to post here until after people complained
about the anonymous posts to other groups.
>>From: dsh@eceyv.ncsu.edu ( )
I don't see any threats, Dougie.
--
Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
--
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent any organization; this is just me.
= kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
From caf-talk Caf Nov 21 03:26:00 1992
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: barnhart@ddsw1.mcs.com (Mr. Aaron Barnhart)
Subject: Re: Query: Can Universities limit network access &/or 'spy` on u
Message-ID:
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 07:32:31 GMT
kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) wrote:
:cmeadows@nyx.cs.du.edu (Chris Meadows) writes:
:
:>On a similar topic, I think that my university is the most anal-
:>retentive regarding its computers of any university on the planet.
:[...]
:
:I think a university should strive to offer the best information
:resources and forums to the whole university community. This should
:include good libraries, a vigorous student press, and good computer
:and network facilities.
:
Speaking of the student press: when we couldn't get a fair shake
from the daily in its news and editorial sections, we (and students
like us at campuses across America) founded alternative newspapers
throughout the 1980s. Was costly, but in many cases our press was
able for a time to carve out a niche, find readers and advertisers,
and contribute overall to campus debate. In some cases the presence
of alternative press made the mainstream press more accountable and
resulted in actions to balance out the mainstream.
It would be nice to see similar ventures succeed in towns where the
university is miserly about distributing computing services. A Unix
board with full news and mail offering student subscriptions, maybe?
Too costly to startup? Too much for students to manage without the
official support and funding of the university? Hmmmmm. Don't
underestimate the power of pissed off students!
Aaron
From caf-talk Caf Nov 21 11:47:00 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,news.admin.misc
From: greeny@eff.org (J S Greenfield)
Subject: Re: [news.admin.misc] Re: ALERT RE POSTINGS AND CORNELL ACCESS TO ALT.*.*.EROTICA HIERARCHY
Message-ID: <1992Nov21.164654.2724@eff.org>
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 16:46:54 GMT
In article <1992Nov20.165220.2446@news.columbia.edu> dan@cubmol.bio.columbia.edu (Daniel Zabetakis) writes:
>>
>>Based upon a summary of the US child pornography standards, it is plausible
>>to me that "RUKO.GIF" could be found to constitute "child pornography."
>>(That particular picture included a close-up of the child's genitalia.)
>
> Perhaps, but only by a gross misinterpretation of the law. RUKO.GIF can
>only be pornographic if _all_ nudity is pornographic. The MA law that
>stated this was overturned.
I make no claims to be an expert on child pornography--but I'm certainly
not satisfied by your claim. I made my comment on the basis of a summary
of a federal statute that specifically identified "lewd" and "lascivious"
photographs of genitalia. RUKO.GIF included both a full-length nude
photo and a close of the child's genitals.
Given the very subjective nature of the terms "lewd" and "lascivious," I
hardly think it is obvious that this photographic could "only be pornographic
if all nudity is pornographic."
> The picture is very obviously one of those art-photo's that I particularly
>hate.
Obvious to you, I guess...
>But there is no erotic content, and the posting drew complaints that
>it shouldn't have been posted to a group with 'erotica' in the name.
I guess "erotic content" is in the eye of the beholder. Perhaps you mean
that it didn't turn *you* on. I don't judge "erotic content" solely by
what turns *me* on.
I had the impression that RUKO.GIF was intended to be "erotic" in nature.
I certainly did not have the impression that it was intended to be "art."
That doesn't say that I'm right. But it does say that your interpretation
is not "obvious" to everybody.
And incidentally, the vast majority of the complaints that I saw regarding
RUKO.GIF were from people who thought it *was* erotic in nature.
--
J. S. Greenfield greeny@top.cis.syr.edu
(I like to put 'greeny' here, greeny@eff.org
but my d*mn system wants a
*real* name!) "What's the difference between an orange?"
From caf-talk Caf Nov 21 12:00:16 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: greeny@eff.org (J S Greenfield)
Subject: Re: The FBI takes a trip to Cornell...
Message-ID: <1992Nov21.170010.3289@eff.org>
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 17:00:10 GMT
In article <9211202036.AA12053@crocus.cit.cornell.edu> escheire@sunlab.cit.cornell.edu (Eric Scheirer) writes:
>
>Here are some thoughts I have on this...
>
>First, I think that the action taken by Cornell regarding Usenet in general
>was refreshingly slight. It would have been all-too-easy to restrict access
>to the whole alt hierarchy, or even all of Usenet, during the "interim"
>period during which investigations are occurring.
But why should they have shut down a.p.b.e in the first place? Was the
group responsible for what one (or a few) individuals posted to it?
Would Mr. Lynn have ordered cornell.general (or whatever you have like that)
shut down if these individuals had posted the questionable item(s) there?
Would the university have closed off the Arts Quad if they caught someone
distributing alleged child pornography there?
I think not. I think that in any of those circumstances, the individuals
would have been addressed, while the forum would have been left alone.
As such, I suspect that the closing down of a.p.b.e. was 99% due to
the erotic content. And if I were at Cornell, I wouldn't look forward to
having Mr. Lynn re-institute the group anytime too soon.
>Some comments from around campus seem to indicate that the student population
>thinks that such an investigation is "too harsh". I think that what the
>FBI is concerned about, and rightly so in my view, is the possibility that
>the student, or people connected to the student in some way, were the
>people behind the camera for the photography.
>
>I think that the charge of _being the one with the scanner_ is much more
>serious that one of just downloading and/or viewing the pictures. It's
>the difference between "trafficking" or "transporting" and "possessing",
>IMHO.
Well, I'm not going to get into an extended discussion over the pro's and con's
of anti-child-porn laws, but I feel quite sure that downloading and viewing
the pictures would not constitute an illegal act, in many cases.
Lots of people download files based solely upon the (very brief) subject
headings. One can hardly be held liable for a crime when they downloaded
and viewed an image that they did not know to be "child pornography" a priori.
>Criticisms I have:
>
>> Marjorie W. Hodges J.D. '91, judicial administrator, said her office is
>> pursuing its own investigation. The student may have violated a Campus
>> Code of Conduct status that forbids "trafficking, for profit or
>> otherwise, in goods and services, when incompatible with the interest
>> of the University and the Cornell community." She would not comment
>> any further on the case.
Has the CCLU made a public statement regarding this matter?
--
J. S. Greenfield greeny@top.cis.syr.edu
(I like to put 'greeny' here, greeny@eff.org
but my d*mn system wants a
*real* name!) "What's the difference between an orange?"
From caf-talk Caf Nov 21 13:20:19 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: escheire@sunlab.cit.cornell.edu (Eric Scheirer)
Subject: Re: The FBI takes a trip to Cornell...
Message-ID: <9211211820.AA14627@crocus.cit.cornell.edu>
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 08:20:02 GMT
In article J.S. Greenfield (greeny@eff.org) (JSG) writes:
>In article <9211202036.AA12053@crocus.cit.cornell.edu>
escheire@sunlab.cit.cornell.edu (Eric Scheirer) (ES) writes:
ES> First, I think that the action taken by Cornell regarding Usenet in general
ES> was refreshingly slight. It would have been all-too-easy to restrict access
ES> to the whole alt hierarchy, or even all of Usenet, during the "interim"
ES> period during which investigations are occurring.
JSG> But why should they have shut down a.p.b.e in the first place? Was the
JSG> group responsible for what one (or a few) individuals posted to it?
I think that the concern was not with "punishment" of people in the Cornell
community who like to "read" a.p.b.e. Rather, it stemmed from other factors,
importantly a demonstration of cooperation with the FBI in the matter, and
a lack of knowledge about the forum itself. I think the concern of the
Cornell administration was whether a.p.b.e *regularly* carries a lot of
*illegal* material.
IMHO, an adminstration is justified in keeping illegal material off its
computers by such an action. I do think their rapid action demonstrates
their ignorance as to the actual nature of a.p.b.e.
JSG> Would Mr. Lynn have ordered cornell.general (or whatever you have like
JSG> that) shut down if these individuals had posted the questionable
JSG> item(s) there?
I don't think so, because they *know* what the content of cu.general is.
If someone were to start posting binaries, in particular child pornograpy
there, I think they would be much more likely to deal with the person
individually. You may be right, though, that this is an inconsistancy.
JSG> Would the university have closed off the Arts Quad if they caught someone
JSG> distributing alleged child pornography there?
Two years ago there was another FBI sting here of an individual who was
manufacturing fake ID's (for non-US readers, driver's licenses doctored
to allow the owner to purchase alcoholic beverages illegally) out of his
dorm room. Apparently, he had connections with organized crime from New
York City and was also trafficking in drugs. Residence Life restricted
use of residence halls for *any* business purposes, legit or otherwise,
in the aftermath.
I think there's a gray area here which should be recognized. The value of
the Arts Quad and of a.b.p.e, particularly in light of its resource
utilization, are *not* equivalent. This is not to say that I think a.b.p.e
is without value -- it is, after all, protected speech for the most part --
but rather that I think that saying "all fora are equal" simply by virtue
of having *some* protected speech content in them is naive.
JSG> As such, I suspect that the closing down of a.p.b.e. was 99% due to
JSG> the erotic content. And if I were at Cornell, I wouldn't look forward to
JSG> having Mr. Lynn re-institute the group anytime too soon.
Two points: none of the other "erotic content" (whatever that means)
groups are gone, eg. alt.sex.* or rec.arts.erotica (for what THAT's worth)
or EVEN alt.sex.pictures. Also, note that this is only for
Cornell's "official" distribution of Usenet. Cornell provides a server
newsstand.cit.cornell.edu which is available for public NNTP access, and
it is this, and the companion servers which have been restricted. The CS
department, for example, maintains its own hierarchy, and the restricted
groups are still available there.
On the other hand, newsstand provides the news that nearly every undergrad
gets, as well as the Theory Center. It's not clear to me if there's an
easy way to go about getting the groups through other Cornell avenues (I
strongly dislike the "buy your own goddamn server" argument).
ES> Some comments from around campus seem to indicate that the student
population
ES> thinks that such an investigation is "too harsh". I think that what the
ES> FBI is concerned about, and rightly so in my view, is the possibility that
ES> the student, or people connected to the student in some way, were the
ES> people behind the camera for the photography.
>
ES> I think that the charge of _being the one with the scanner_ is much more
ES> serious that one of just downloading and/or viewing the pictures. It's
ES> the difference between "trafficking" or "transporting" and "possessing",
ES> IMHO.
JSG> Well, I'm not going to get into an extended discussion over the
pro's and con's
JSG> of anti-child-porn laws, but I feel quite sure that downloading
and viewing
JSG> the pictures would not constitute an illegal act, in many cases.
JSG> Lots of people download files based solely upon the (very brief) subject
JSG> headings. One can hardly be held liable for a crime when they downloaded
JSG> and viewed an image that they did not know to be "child pornography"
JSG> a priori.
I agree. Were you intending to disagree with what I said? Again, the
concern here is that the involved student was the one UPLOADING some of
these files; and by extension, that he might have been involved with the
photography in the first place.
(this is quoted from the _Cornell Daily Sun_)
CDS>> Marjorie W. Hodges J.D. '91, judicial administrator, said her office is
CDS>> pursuing its own investigation. The student may have violated a Campus
CDS>> Code of Conduct status that forbids "trafficking, for profit or
CDS>> otherwise, in goods and services, when incompatible with the interest
CDS>> of the University and the Cornell community." She would not comment
CDS>> any further on the case.
JSG> Has the CCLU made a public statement regarding this matter?
Not, to my knowledge, as of yet. However, the story only "broke" on Friday
morning, and we don't really have a local news source around here during
the weekends. Ithaca has no morning newspaper of its own, and the Sun
only publishes on school days. There will certainly be follow-up reportage
on Monday.
I'm also expecting a statement from Cornell Information Technologies on
this matter. They generally issue official statements of the relevant
portions of the Computer Abuse Policy and so forth, to try to keep the
public informed as to what rules have allegedly been broken.
Their statement here will have to be slightly different, as I don't believe
that there are computer abuse ramifications per se here.
----
Eric Scheirer - Sun Undergrad Lab Consultant - escheire@sunlab.cit.cornell.edu
Any opinions expressed above are mine alone, and are not intended to
represent views of the Cornell CS Dept, or Cornell Information Technologies --
I don't even work for CIT!
From caf-talk Caf Nov 21 13:45:01 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,news.admin.policy,comp.admin.policy,alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.d
From: kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [UPI] "FBI probes computer child porn at Cornell"
Message-ID: <1992Nov21.184453.4548@eff.org>
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 18:44:53 GMT
Copyright 1992 by UPI. Reposted with permission from the ClariNet
Electronic Newspaper newsgroup clari.tw.computers, et al. For more
info on ClariNet, write to info@clarinet.com or phone 1-800-USE-NETS.
ITHACA, N.Y. (UPI) -- The FBI is investigating whether a Cornell
University sophomore has transmitted child pornography over computer
bulletin boards, a report said Friday.
The New York Times said agents this week raided a student's room as
part of an investigation that began Nov. 11, after the administrator of
another bulletin board told the Ivy League university of seeing material
involving sexual exploitation of minors.
The name of the student had not been released because he had not yet
been charged with any crime.
Agents said they were checking to see whether the student used
graphics imaging technology to copy the pornographic photos onto
computer files and transmitted them on Netnews, an internationally used
bulletin board.
The investigation is the third in the past four years centered on
abuse of Cornell's computer system.
In October, sophomores David Blumenthal and Mark Pilgrim were
sentenced to community service for creating a computer virus that
wreaked havoc on software as far away as Japan.
In 1988, graduate student Robert Morris Jr. was convicted and fined
$10,000 for launching a computer ``worm,'' which also destroys software
but differs from a virus in that it is self-perpetuating.
Cornell is located in Ithaca, N.Y., about 160 miles northwest of New
York City.
--
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent EFF; this is just me.
=kadie@eff.org, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
From caf-talk Caf Nov 21 16:41:58 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [alt.censorship] Re: Sex Censorship
Message-ID:
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 21:29:18 GMT
[A repost - Carl]
From caf-talk Caf Nov 21 16:41:58 1992
From: Reader
Subject: Re: Sex Censorship
Message-ID: <1992Nov21.194249.24362@mail.cornell.edu>
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 19:42:49 GMT
In article Derrick Pohl,
apohl@unixg.ubc.ca writes:
>Recently all sex-related newsgroups have been banned from the usenet here
>at the University of British Columbia.
Cornell just shut all of these down yesterday. Seems someone here was
posting kiddie porn. Made the national news. I wonder what they were
majoring in?
--
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent any organization; this is just me.
= kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
From caf-talk Caf Nov 22 04:45:19 1992
From: alien@clinet.fi (Risto Juvonen)
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,news.admin.policy,comp.admin.policy,alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.d
Subject: Re: [UPI] "FBI probes computer child porn at Cornell"
Date: 22 Nov 1992 11:27:32 +0200
Message-ID: <1enjq4INNslt@clinet.fi>
kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
: Copyright 1992 by UPI. Reposted with permission from the ClariNet
: Electronic Newspaper newsgroup clari.tw.computers, et al. For more
: info on ClariNet, write to info@clarinet.com or phone 1-800-USE-NETS.
:
: ITHACA, N.Y. (UPI) -- The FBI is investigating whether a Cornell
: University sophomore has transmitted child pornography over computer
: bulletin boards, a report said Friday.
: The New York Times said agents this week raided a student's room as
: part of an investigation that began Nov. 11, after the administrator of
: another bulletin board told the Ivy League university of seeing material
: involving sexual exploitation of minors.
: The name of the student had not been released because he had not yet
: been charged with any crime.
: Agents said they were checking to see whether the student used
: graphics imaging technology to copy the pornographic photos onto
: computer files and transmitted them on Netnews, an internationally used
: bulletin board.
: The investigation is the third in the past four years centered on
: abuse of Cornell's computer system.
huh, I'm very pleased that I'm living in Finland, our "secret police"
has better things to do with taxpayers money that they would waste
time for investigating pornography. And, they could not even do that:
pornography is not enough big crime that they can do house search.
Nice to live in _free_ country! Sorry for you, U.S. citizens...
alien
From caf-talk Caf Nov 22 14:40:12 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: greeny@top.cis.syr.edu (J. S. Greenfield)
Subject: Re: The FBI takes a trip to Cornell...
Message-ID: <1992Nov22.130520.13415@newstand.syr.edu>
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 92 13:05:20 EST
In article <9211211820.AA14627@crocus.cit.cornell.edu> escheire@sunlab.cit.cornell.edu (Eric Scheirer) writes:
>
>JSG> But why should they have shut down a.p.b.e in the first place? Was the
>JSG> group responsible for what one (or a few) individuals posted to it?
>
>I think that the concern was not with "punishment" of people in the Cornell
>community who like to "read" a.p.b.e. Rather, it stemmed from other factors,
>importantly a demonstration of cooperation with the FBI in the matter, and
>a lack of knowledge about the forum itself. I think the concern of the
>Cornell administration was whether a.p.b.e *regularly* carries a lot of
>*illegal* material.
To my eye, the adminsitration should not *assume* that the group regularly
carries such material. If they are concerned, better that they should
actually *check* the group. (They should have a reasonably-sized backlog
still on their server.)
Alleged "child pornography" is *not* common on a.p.b.e (though there are
almost always examples of copyright violations).
>IMHO, an adminstration is justified in keeping illegal material off its
>computers by such an action. I do think their rapid action demonstrates
>their ignorance as to the actual nature of a.p.b.e.
Yes, but by the reports, they have not expressed concern over illegal
materials being *imported* onto Cornell machines from outside. They were
concerned over the postings of a single student *at* Cornell.
Given that they (along with the FBI) are already dealing with the student, it
is hard to understand what benefit they seek to achieve by shutting down
a.p.b.e.
>JSG> Would Mr. Lynn have ordered cornell.general (or whatever you have like
>JSG> that) shut down if these individuals had posted the questionable
>JSG> item(s) there?
>
>I don't think so, because they *know* what the content of cu.general is.
>If someone were to start posting binaries, in particular child pornograpy
>there, I think they would be much more likely to deal with the person
>individually. You may be right, though, that this is an inconsistancy.
>
>JSG> Would the university have closed off the Arts Quad if they caught someone
>JSG> distributing alleged child pornography there?
>
>Two years ago there was another FBI sting here of an individual who was
>manufacturing fake ID's (for non-US readers, driver's licenses doctored
>to allow the owner to purchase alcoholic beverages illegally) out of his
>dorm room. Apparently, he had connections with organized crime from New
>York City and was also trafficking in drugs. Residence Life restricted
>use of residence halls for *any* business purposes, legit or otherwise,
>in the aftermath.
>
>I think there's a gray area here which should be recognized. The value of
>the Arts Quad and of a.b.p.e, particularly in light of its resource
>utilization, are *not* equivalent. This is not to say that I think a.b.p.e
>is without value -- it is, after all, protected speech for the most part --
>but rather that I think that saying "all fora are equal" simply by virtue
>of having *some* protected speech content in them is naive.
But we're not talking about resources here. If the administration were to
say "We're not going to carry any more "binaries" groups, because we
don't have the resources to store the articles (and this were the truth)
then that would be fine.
But that is not the case, here. As such, I don't think that questions of
resource-use apply at all to this situation.
>JSG> As such, I suspect that the closing down of a.p.b.e. was 99% due to
>JSG> the erotic content. And if I were at Cornell, I wouldn't look forward to
>JSG> having Mr. Lynn re-institute the group anytime too soon.
>
>Two points: none of the other "erotic content" (whatever that means)
>groups are gone, eg. alt.sex.* or rec.arts.erotica (for what THAT's worth)
>or EVEN alt.sex.pictures.
I should clarify my statement. I didn't mean to suggest that Cornell was
on a crusade to eliminate such groups. I just meant to suggest that, where
you have an administration that is not *very* firmly committed to free
expression/exchange of ideas/etc. (which is virtually every college
administration that I've encountered), such groups are going to be very
susceptible to abuse.
I *do* consider it problematic if the university handles a problem with
a.p.b.e differently from a similar problem in, say, cu.general. I suspect
that any group in the alt.sex hierarchy would be treated as a "suspect"
group--and would be treated similarly to a.p.b.e. if a potential problem
arose. On the other hand, I suspect that the same technique would not
be used for non-"suspect" groups.
And I wouldn't expect to see a suspect group back anytime soon, because
I just don't think the administration sees the ban of a suspect group
to be as objectionable as a ban on a non-suspect group. (In other words,
they don't great underlying motivation to re-institute the group quickly.)
>ES> I think that the charge of _being the one with the scanner_ is much more
>ES> serious that one of just downloading and/or viewing the pictures. It's
>ES> the difference between "trafficking" or "transporting" and "possessing",
>ES> IMHO.
>
>JSG> Well, I'm not going to get into an extended discussion over the
> pro's and con's
>JSG> of anti-child-porn laws, but I feel quite sure that downloading
> and viewing
>JSG> the pictures would not constitute an illegal act, in many cases.
>
>JSG> Lots of people download files based solely upon the (very brief) subject
>JSG> headings. One can hardly be held liable for a crime when they downloaded
>JSG> and viewed an image that they did not know to be "child pornography"
>JSG> a priori.
>
>I agree. Were you intending to disagree with what I said? Again, the
>concern here is that the involved student was the one UPLOADING some of
>these files; and by extension, that he might have been involved with the
>photography in the first place.
Was I agreeing? Yes and know. yes, I agree that there is a difference.
But your comment seemed to suggest that downloader were culpable also--just
not as much the uploader. My point was simply that, assuming we were
talking about illegal child pornography, many downloaders may not have
been culpable at all.
--
J. S. Greenfield greeny@top.cis.syr.edu
(I like to put 'greeny' here,
but my d*mn system wants a
*real* name!) "What's the difference between an orange?"
From caf-talk Caf Nov 22 21:00:15 1992
From: gaynor@inferno.rutgers.edu (Silver)
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,news.admin.policy,comp.admin.policy,alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.d
Subject: Re: [UPI] "FBI probes computer child porn at Cornell"
Message-ID:
Date: 23 Nov 92 01:51:12 GMT
UPI writes:
> The FBI is investigating whether a Cornell University sophomore has
> transmitted child pornography over computer bulletin boards, a report said
> Friday.
Washington DC! Listen up! Give the FBI more important things to do!
> material involving sexual exploitation of minors
I'll bet they're payed a hell of a lot more than Ronald McD would pay 'em.
> The name of the student had not been released because he had not yet been
> charged with any crime.
Then don't jerk my fucking chain.
> Netnews
That's "Usenet" or "UseNet", not "Netnews".
> In October, sophomores David Blumenthal and Mark Pilgrim were sentenced to
> community service for creating a computer virus that wreaked havoc on
> software as far away as Japan.
Good. Thanks!
> In 1988, graduate student Robert Morris Jr. was convicted and fined $10,000
> for launching a computer ``worm,'' which also destroys software but differs
> from a virus in that it is self-perpetuating.
THE PERSECUTION OF MORRIS WAS UNJUSTIFIED (and I _hate_ using all-caps for
emphasis). It was his graduate project in computer risks and security. Given
the worm's tenacity, the likelihood of its accidental release is high enough to
believe that its release _was_ accidental. Regardless, it did nothing more
than propagate itself. Many consider his worm a good thing.
This country (USA) is pissing me off.
Regards, [Ag]
From caf-talk Caf Nov 22 22:33:59 1992
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: sef@kithrup.COM (Sean Eric Fagan)
Subject: Re: [UPI] "FBI probes computer child porn at Cornell"
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 02:53:11 GMT
Message-ID: <1992Nov23.025311.19140@kithrup.COM>
In article gaynor@inferno.rutgers.edu (Silver) writes:
>THE PERSECUTION OF MORRIS WAS UNJUSTIFIED (and I _hate_ using all-caps for
>emphasis). It was his graduate project in computer risks and security. Given
>the worm's tenacity, the likelihood of its accidental release is high enough to
>believe that its release _was_ accidental. Regardless, it did nothing more
>than propagate itself. Many consider his worm a good thing.
Many consider it a criminal act. I do not know anyone of the thousands of
people whose machines were brought to a standstill who considers the
Internet Worm to have been "a good thing." In addition, there was little to
nothing accidental about the worm; it was not a graduate project (no advisor
would have permitted it, except under the strictest of controls, none of
which were present in the worm); and there is reason to believe that its
release was *not* accidental.
What Morris did was unjustified, and the fact that he got away with nothing
but a slap on the wrist is disgusting; I still think everyone affected
should have filed a civil suit as well as criminal charges.
--
Sean Eric Fagan | "Time and space is a bitch!"
sef@kithrup.COM | -- Gooshie (Dennis Wolfberg),
-----------------+ "Quantum Leap: Killin' Time"
Any opinions expressed are my own, and generally unpopular with others.
