Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.news Subject: Computers and Academic Freedom News 02.21 (Digest) Approved: kadie@eff.org Computers and Academic Freedom News Vol. 02, No. 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: emr@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au (Elizabeth M. Reid) Subject: Article 0 -- Abstract of CAF-News 02.21 [Week ending May 10th, 1992 [The May 3rd issue is in production. - Carl] ========================== KEY ================================ The words after the numbers are a short PARAPHRASES of the articles, or QUOTES from them, NOT AN OBJECTIVE SUMMARY and not necessarily my opinion. =============================================================== Notes 1 to 4 discuss the events at Iowa State University in which the Usenet group rec.arts.erotica was banned and in which a student's computer access was revoked after he redistributed articles from that group - there is, however, a happy ending to the story. 1. "ISU has once again overstepped its bounds... ISU is subject to the 5th amendment, which guarantees due process. ISU cannot use its 'executive powers' to decide what students have the right to use the equipment without exercising due process." <1992May6.021706.7137@news.iastate.edu> 2. "When Iowa State University restricted alt.sex it violated the principles of academic freedom. When it punished a student for exercising his Constitutional right to free expression in a University forum and imposed that punishment summarily in violation of that student's Constitutional right to due process, it violated the law." <1992May6.033143.16713@eff.org> 3. "I am surprised and saddened that it is a university that is crossing this complicated line *toward* censorship and *more* restrictions when even the federal and most state legal statutes contradict such actions." <9205071603.AA26232@antaire.com> 4. From the student who had his account closed: "I have my account back." <1992May8.064304.8364@news.iastate.edu> Notes 5 and 6 concern issues of relevance to the situation at ISU. The first offers a critique of an article in the Winnipeg Free Press which "exposed" the alt.sex.* Usenet hierarchy's availability at the University of Manitoba. The second discusses the University of Nebraska-Lincoln's decision to stop supplying the entire alt. hierarchy. 5. "Usenet is *most positively* an invaluable resource. If anything represents the free flow of information and expression of ideas that our institutions of higher learning purport to value, this is it." <1992May10.093635.27536@ccu.umanitoba.ca> 6. UNL has said that had they continued to supply the "pornographic" alt. hierarchy and someone had complained to the federal government, UNL would have been required to prove that the groups met the criteria of the NSFNET backbone service's acceptable use policy, or risk losing NSFNET access. This is based on a misunderstanding of the NSFNET's powers and of their policies. <1992May5.005813.281@eff.org> In Note 7 Carl Kadie offers his critique of the Middle East Technical University's policy relating to computer and network use. 7. "The METU policy provides no due process protection and bans much speech." <1992May4.223243.28741@eff.org> Note 8 describes the Potomac Telephone Company's examination of the feasibility of creating an "electronic village" in Blacksburg, Virginia. 8. "If such an undertaking proves feasible, all homes, businesses, and schools in the town will be connected on a high speed electronic network....Those on the network will be able to use electronic mail, join online discussion groups, and take advantage of a wide range of business, educational, financial, and general communications services. They may also use the Internet..." - Elizabeth] In this issue: Michael L Begley 31 Student at ISU has account revoked. Carl M. Kadie 292 > Gray Watson 57 iowa state censorship... Mark D. Smucker 22 ISU student account restored. Kevin A Buhr 124 FP Article Confirms Billionth Monkey Hypothesis Carl M. Kadie 211 "The NSF made be do it" (was no subject) Carl M. Kadie 181 Critique of Turkish AUP (was "just read and think") P-A C S Forum 32 Virginia Tech Electronic Village Computers and Academic Freedom News Managing Editor: Carl M. Kadie (kadie@eff.org) Administration: William W. Arnold (caf-talk-request@eff.org, warnold@eff.org) Associate Editor: Elizabeth M. Reid (emr@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au) Associate Editor: Paul Joslin (joslin@tso.uc.edu) Associate Editor: Adam C. Gross (ag3j+@andrew.cmu.edu) To contribute to the list, send email to "caf-talk@eff.org". Your note will appear immediately on the caf-talk mailing list and in the alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk newsgroup. Back issues are available via anonymous ftp to ftp.eff.org. The directory is pub/academic/news. Abstracts of CAF-news are in file pub/academic/abstracts. The CAF archive is also available via email. For information, send email to archive-server@eff.org. Include the line: send acad-freedom README Disclaimer: This CAF-News abstract was compiled by a guest editor or a regular editor (Paul Joslin, Elizabeth M. Reid, Adam C. Gross, 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. The addresses for the list are: comp-academic-freedom-talk@eff.org - for contributions to the list or caf-talk@eff.org listserv@eff.org - for automated additions/deletions (send email with the line "help" for details.) caf-talk-request@eff.org - for administrivia Also, if you read newsgroups, look for alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk and alt.comp.acad-freedom.news. ------------ ------------------------------ From caf-talk Caf May 5 00:00:00 1992 From: spam@iastate.edu (Michael L Begley) Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,alt.censorship,comp.org.eff.talk Subject: Article 1--Student at ISU has account revoked. Message-ID: <1992May6.021706.7137@news.iastate.edu> Date: 6 May 92 02:17:06 GMT In yet another chapter in the Iowa State University censorship of usenet saga, the ISU computation center decided today to restrict rec.arts.erotica. (r.a.e) This is the first group not in the alt hierarchy to be restricted, and the only moderated group. In reaction, Mark Smucker (mds@iastate.edu) reposted to isu.newsgroup the most recent 8 or 9 submissions to r.a.e to isu.newsgroups, the group where news announcements are made. For this, Mark's account was revoked. Mark was given no indication that he had violated any university policy. There is no policy forbidding the posting of "inappropriate material" to a newsgroup, nor is there a policy forbidding posting obscene material to a newsgroup. ISU has once again overstepped its bounds. ISU students pay a computer fee every semester. ISU students use computers for studies & research as well as recreation. Most importantly, ISU is subject to the 5th amendment, which guarantees due process. ISU cannot use its "executive powers" to decide what students have the right to use the equipment without exercising due process. -mike begley spam@iastate.edu -- Michael Begley Ask me how A riot is the language spam@iastate.edu Iowa State University of the unheard. (515) 296-8378 is censoring my usenet access -MLK ------------------------------ From caf-talk Caf May 5 00:00:00 1992 Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,alt.censorship,comp.org.eff.talk,isu.newsgroup From: kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie) Subject: Article 2--Re: Student at ISU has account revoked. Message-ID: <1992May6.033143.16713@eff.org> Date: Wed, 6 May 1992 03:31:43 GMT spam@iastate.edu (Michael L Begley) writes: >In yet another chapter in the Iowa State University censorship of >usenet saga, the ISU computation center decided today to restrict >rec.arts.erotica. (r.a.e) This is the first group not in the alt >hierarchy to be restricted, and the only moderated group. >In reaction, Mark Smucker (mds@iastate.edu) reposted to isu.newsgroup >the most recent 8 or 9 submissions to r.a.e to isu.newsgroups, the >group where news announcements are made. For this, Mark's account was >revoked. [...] When Iowa State University restricted alt.sex it violated the principles of academic freedom. When it punished a student for exercising his Constitutional right to free expression in a University forum and imposed that punishment summarily in violation of that student's Constitutional right to due process, it violated the law. Iowa State University will likely try to justify its action (after the fact) by saying that it is enforcing sexual harassment or obscenity laws. No excuse justifies violation of due process rights. Moreoever, the courts have consistently stuck down university attempts to justify censorship of students with these excuses. - Carl ANNOTATED REFERENCES (All these documents are available on-line. Access information follows.) ================= faq/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? ================= faq/media.control ================= 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? ================= law/uwm-post-v-u-of-wisconsin ================= The full text of UWM POST v. U. of Wisconsin. This recent district court ruling goes into detail about the difference between protected offensive expression and illegal harassment. It even mentions email. It concludes: "The founding fathers of this nation produced a remarkable document in the Constitution but it was ratified only with the promise of the Bill of Rights. The First Amendment is central to our concept of freedom. The God-given "unalienable rights" that the infant nation rallied to in the Declaration of Independence can be preserved only if their application is rigorously analyzed. The problems of bigotry and discrimination sought to be addressed here are real and truly corrosive of the educational environment. But freedom of speech is almost absolute in our land and the only restriction the fighting words doctrine can abide is that based on the fear of violent reaction. Content-based prohibitions such as that in the UW Rule, however well intended, simply cannot survive the screening which our Constitution demands." ================= law/student-publications.misc ================= Quotes from the book _Law of the Student Press_ by the Student Press Law Center (1985,1988). They say that four-letter words are protected speech, that public universities are not likely to be liable for publications that they for which they do not control the contents, and that the _Hazelwood_ decision does not apply to universities. ================= law/constitution.us ================= The Constitution of the United States ================= law/constraints.constitutional ================= Comments from _A Practical Guide to Legal Issues Affecting College Teachers_ by Partrica A. Hollander, D. Parker Young, and Donald D. Gehring. (College Administration Publication, 1985). Discusses the constitutional constraints on public universities including the requires for freedom of expression, freedom against unreasonable searches and seizures, due process, specific rules. ================= law/cohen-v-california ================= Netnews article with reference _Cohen v. California_, "in which the court ruled that Cohen's jacket, which stated "Fuck the Draft" was a protected form of free speech, even though he wore it in a county courthouse." ================= law/doe-v-u-of-michigan ================= This is Doe v. University of Michigan. In this widely referenced decision, the district judge down struck the University's rules against discriminatory harassment because the rules were found to be too broad and too vague. ================= law/due-process.buchanan ================= Quotes about the due process requirements of "notice of charges" and "find of facts" at a formal administrative hearing. The quotes are from: _Procedural due process guidelines for disciplinary hearings resulting in suspension or expulsion in higher education_ by Ernest T. Buchanan III. Published by Education/Law Research Associates, 1972 ================= law/due-process.french ================= Quotes about the due process requirements of "notice of charges" and "find of facts" at a formal administrative hearing. The quotes are from: _The Redefinition of the Exclusionary Rule as to Student Procedural Due Process in High Education_. A monograph from the Office of the General Counsel [of Southern Illinois University] by Dr. Larry L. French, General Counsel, 1977. ================= law/due-process.weckstein ================= Quotes about the due process requirements of "notice of charges" and "find of facts" at a formal administrative hearing. The quotes are from: _School Discipline and Student Rights: an advocate's manual_ by Paul Weckstein, revised edition, 1982, Center for Law and Education. ================= law/goss-v-lopez.fischer ================= Comments from _Teacher's and the Law_, 3rd edition, by Louis Fischer, et al. Published in 1991 by Longman. It reports that the Supreme Court says that some modicum of due process is necessary unless the matter is trivial or there is an emergency. ================= law/goss-v-lopez.mnookin ================= Comments from _In the Interest of Children_, R. Mnookin (Ed.), Franklin E. Zimring and Rayman L. Solomon (Contrib. Authors). It reports that the Supreme Court says that some modicum of due process is necessary unless the matter is trivial or there is an emergency. Also, ================= law/keyishian-v-board-of-regents ================= In this Supreme Court case, the Court said that public universities can not infringe on the Constitutionally protected rights of their students and employees (specially with regard to loyalty oaths). ================= law/mills-v-bd-of-ed ================= Summary from the ACLU's Handbook _The Right of Students_ 3rd Edition by Janet. R. Price, Alan H. Levine, and Eve Cary. p. 61. It says before you can be severely punished, you have a due process right to know the specific acts you are charged with committing and the specific rules that those acts violate. ================= law/mt-healthy-v-doyle ================= _Due Process for School Officials: A Guide for the Conduct of Administrative Proceedings_ by Edgar H. Bittle (1986) says that a formal hearing should make a detailed "findings of fact" list. ================= law/perry-v-perry ================= Comments from the ACLU Handbook _The Rights of _Teachers_. It says that campus mail systems (and other school facilities) can be limited public forums. (Perry v. Perry was about an interschool mail system. It was one of the cases that defined the Public Forum Doctrine.) Also, a paraphrase from an ACLU handbook _The Rights of Teachers_. It says that generally, speech, if otherwise shielded from punishment by the First Amendment, does not lose that protection because its tone is sharp. Also, from p. 92, it says that there are legal limits to what a (public) school can ask its teachers to sign. [Some of these same limits might apply to what a school can ask a user to sign as a condition of getting (or keeping) a computer account.] ================= law/rust-v-sullivan ================= The decision and decent for the so-called abortion information gag rule case. The decision explicitly mentions universities as a place where free expression is so important that gag rules would not be allowed. ================= law/san-diego-committee-v-gov-bd ================= Excerpts from San Diego Committee v. Governing Bd., 790 F.2d 1471 (1986). A decision by an appellate court that applied the Supreme Court's Public Forum Doctrine (to a school newspaper). ================= law/stanley-v-magrath ================= Comments from _Public Schools Law: Teachers' and Students' Rights_ 2nd Ed. by Martha M. McCarthy and Nelda H. Cambron-McCabe, published in 1987 by Allyn and Bacon, Inc. It says, in part, "[a]lthough school boards are not obligated to support student papers, if a given publication was originally created as a free speech forum, removal of financial or other school board support can be construed as an unlawful effort to stifle free expression." Also, "school authorities cannot withdraw support from a student publication simply because of displeasure with the content" and "the content of a school-sponsored paper that is established as a medium for student expression cannot be regulated more closely than a nonsponsored paper". Also, it tells what to do about libel in student publications. ================= ================= These documents are available by anonymous ftp (the preferred method) and by email. To get the files via ftp, do an anonymous ftp to ftp.eff.org (192.88.144.4), and get file(s): pub/academic/faq/censorship-and-harassment pub/academic/faq/media.control pub/academic/law/uwm-post-v-u-of-wisconsin pub/academic/law/student-publications.misc pub/academic/law/constitution.us pub/academic/law/constraints.constitutional pub/academic/law/cohen-v-california pub/academic/law/doe-v-u-of-michigan pub/academic/law/due-process.buchanan pub/academic/law/due-process.french pub/academic/law/due-process.weckstein pub/academic/law/goss-v-lopez.fischer pub/academic/law/goss-v-lopez.mnookin pub/academic/law/keyishian-v-board-of-regents pub/academic/law/mills-v-bd-of-ed pub/academic/law/mt-healthy-v-doyle pub/academic/law/perry-v-perry pub/academic/law/rust-v-sullivan pub/academic/law/san-diego-committee-v-gov-bd pub/academic/law/stanley-v-magrath To get the files my 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 censorship-and-harassment send acad-freedom/faq media.control send acad-freedom/law uwm-post-v-u-of-wisconsin send acad-freedom/law student-publications.misc send acad-freedom/law constitution.us send acad-freedom/law constraints.constitutional send acad-freedom/law cohen-v-california send acad-freedom/law doe-v-u-of-michigan send acad-freedom/law due-process.buchanan send acad-freedom/law due-process.french send acad-freedom/law due-process.weckstein send acad-freedom/law goss-v-lopez.fischer send acad-freedom/law goss-v-lopez.mnookin send acad-freedom/law keyishian-v-board-of-regents send acad-freedom/law mills-v-bd-of-ed send acad-freedom/law mt-healthy-v-doyle send acad-freedom/law perry-v-perry send acad-freedom/law rust-v-sullivan send acad-freedom/law san-diego-committee-v-gov-bd send acad-freedom/law stanley-v-magrath -- Carl Kadie -- I do not represent EFF; this is just me. =kadie@eff.org, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu = ------------------------------ From caf-talk Caf May 7 00:00:00 1992 From: gray@antaire.com (Gray Watson) Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk Subject: Article 3--iowa state censorship... Message-ID: <9205071603.AA26232@antaire.com> Date: 7 May 92 16:03:40 GMT I posted the included message of protest to Iowa State about the censorship and received the following addresses of administrators who are in charge. I have forwarded my letter of protest on to them. gstrawn@nsf.gov George Strawn, Director (on leave to NSF til Jul) seagrave@iastate.edu Richard Seagrave, Acting Director covert@iastate.edu George Covert, Associate Director frazier@iastate.edu Bill Frazier, Assistant Director dolewis@iastate.edu Dorothy Lewis, Assistant Director FYI: root/postmaster there are the working gurus whose views often differ *significantly* from the administration. Also, according to Iowa State, they axed *part* of the alt.* newsgroups as well as rec.arts.erotica and then suspended the student's account right before finals, no less. Also, it seems that the University of Nebraska at Lincoln has now censored *all* the alt.* newsgroups. postmaster or root@cse.unl.edu may be a good address to inquire about the proper address to send letters of protests. Please excuse me if I am not timely with all this. No usenet access reduces my information. Seems most of the censorship (at least at Iowa State) has been occurring since December. gray ---- This message is in protest to the reports of censorship of Internet network materials at the University of Nebraska at Lincoln. Restrictions such as those placed on the alt newsgroups (including alt.sys.sun, alt.os.mach, etc.) demonstrates a very narrow-view solution that is, IMHO, uncharacteristic of a university environment. Iowa State University is quickly earning for itself an extremely bad reputation on the Internet, all from, it seems, improper handling of a similar situation. It now sounds like University of Nebraska's reputation should be held in question. I certainly understand that pornography and other explicit material may not be deemed appropriate by the powers the be at UNL, but would they be so quick to remove the same explicit material from the libraries and bookstores in the local community? I am surprised and saddened that it is a university that is crossing this complicated line *toward* censorship and *more* restrictions when even the federal and most state legal statutes contradict such actions. I urge the powers that be to take a breath and reevaluate the situation. Sincerely, Gray Watson COO Antaire Corporation ------------------------------ From caf-talk Caf May 8 00:00:00 1992 Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk From: mds@iastate.edu (Mark D. Smucker) Subject: Article 4--ISU student account restored. Message-ID: <1992May8.064304.8364@news.iastate.edu> Date: Fri, 8 May 1992 06:43:04 GMT Hello, 1) I have my account back. 2) Dr. Seagrave, the interim director of the Comp Center has promised to get his letter of ``feasibility'' of user controlled access vs. machine access to the vice provost John Dobson and to the Dean of students, Mary Beth Snyder by Monday. ( see SEF press packet if this makes no sense. ) 3) If you would like more information, mail me. Thanks to all that mailed officials etc... Mark D. Smucker --- mds@iastate.edu P.S. This made the front page of the university newspaper. ------------------------------ From caf-talk Caf May 10 00:00:00 1992 Newsgroups: local.unix.general,wpg.general,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk From: buhr@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Kevin Andrew Buhr) Subject: Article 5--FP Article Confirms Billionth Monkey Hypothesis Message-ID: <1992May10.093635.27536@ccu.umanitoba.ca> Date: Sun, 10 May 1992 09:36:35 GMT [ This post concerns a poorly researched article published by the Winnipeg (Manitoba, Canada) Free Press on Saturday, May 9, 1992 which "exposed" the alt.sex.* hierarchy available on the University of Manitoba Unix system. The university administration swung into action and on the day the article appeared, the alt.sex.* branch of our news hierarchy vanished. In addition to our local groups, I submit it to a.c.a-f.t to serve as, if nothing else, another flagship signalling the end of our civilization... or something like that. BTW, our site is a healthy 1600 group feed, and to the credit of our computer administration personnel, this is the first incident of its kind that I know of. ] [ self-indulgent comment on the article in question follows... ] #pragma soapbox(on) It just goes to show that pairing up a typewriter and an uninformed reporter is sure to lead to trouble. My favorite part was the head of computer security pulling up 169 sexual bondage entries. I expect it was more like nine "bondage entries" and 160 test messages from people trying out their "wizvax" aliases. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if Mr. DeCruyenaere's presentation was misrepresented, but shouldn't an attempt have been made to fully demonstrate the Usenet forum? In terms of entertainment value, the cute little key phrases like "tapping into the system", "information network", and "on the file" were a close second, and the description of the Internet as a "data base used by 12 million people worldwide in universities, defence departments, and major corporations" was a not-too-distant third. It seems that the Free Press figures that, if they can combine "computer networks", "pronography", and "university" in one article, it's a front page story. I guess boring little tidbits about riots in L. A. just don't cut it as real news any more. I almost keeled over when Terry Falconer, our administration vice-president, said he could "order the university's Unix system to sever its link...and that would be the end of it." It's no wonder he doesn't wave his hand and lower tuition when he's so occupied with battling the forces of evil. Where Ms. Paul, the article's author, got the idea that Usenet was a collection of pornographic computer games I'll never know, but I'll lay odds that she never actually saw an a.s.b posting. And who are all these "American Subscribers" who "file" entries "via telephone lines?" Yet, I'm sure that you, gentle listener, will sleep better knowing that our boys in blue are "aware of the 'computer porn' and plan to trace its origin." That is, once they figure out exactly what crime has been committed. I guess they haven't gotten around to the question of how they'll prosecute people in Denmark. Anyway, I hate being up here as much as you hate listening to me, so... #pragma soapbox(off) [ comments on a local article follow ... ] In <1992May10.020106.1432@ccu.umanitoba.ca> salomon@silver.cs.umanitoba.ca (Daniel J. Salomon) writes: >I haven't read any of the alt.sex newsgroups in years, but the >impression that I formed then was that 50% of the postings were >fictitious, and the other 50% should have been. >Let's face it; that newsgroup was just for entertainment. This isn't really the point. The university libraries carry a copy of _The Shining_ and no less than thirteen Piers Anthony books. Opinions vary, but I can state emphatically that neither author is a 20th century Shakespeare. Besides, is "/usr/games/wump" (our great _Hunt the Wumpus_ port) around for its educational value? > Whatever >expenses carrying such a newgroup incurred would be very hard to >justify for a research and academic institution. At the same time, of course, nobody balks at $6/student to keep B52's (our money-losing campus bar) afloat. Frankly, "alt.sex.bondage" has better usage statistics than it'll ever have. What kind of a message are we sending people? Sex is bad, but damaging your liver is good? Not only is a.s.b healthier, but it's marginal cost is low. Yes, it is a high-traffic newsgrounp: so is comp.windows.x, and I defy anyone to point out more than a dozen users on campus who read that one regularly. >If you don't make a big fuss the whole thing will blow over, and >everything will be back to normal in no time. This is probably true. >The only reason to fight for those newsgroups is to fight against >censorship, but before you start such a fight, make sure that the >information that those newsgroups carried is worth fighting for. This isn't so true. If you give some people an inch, they'll take a mile. I'm as cognizant of the small "p" politics as anyone. I am suspicious and resentful of the fact that this story broke a week after exams wound up and four days before many users will lose their accounts. I don't care a wit for "principles"; this is just a bad precendent and a threat to my newsgroup access. I hope that Mr. Falconer's grandstanding was 50% lip service and 50% misrepresentation, because I don't want anyone with his attitude involved in administering my education. Note that I feel so confident he has never even looked at a Usenet article, that I am comfortable publically insulting him. Neat, eh? Usenet is *most positively* an invaluable resource. If anything represents the free flow of information and expression of ideas that our institutions of higher learning purport to value, this is it. I have learned as much from reading News as I've learned from all my "formal" courses put together, and I'm sure many other students can seriously say the same thing. Where else on earth is there a more comprehensive and accessible information pool? This is to say nothing of the other resources the Internet and other network collections provide. On the bright side, Usenet has long been hidden away from the mainstream media. Inaccurate articles like this, I hope, will only serve to further cloud the issue and, with the help of smoke and mirrors, let it hold out a little longer. Yeah... right... Kevin Buhr ------------------------------ From caf-talk Caf May 4 00:00:00 1992 Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,comp.org.eff.talk,unl.general From: kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie) Subject: Article 6--"The NSF made be do it" (was no subject) Message-ID: <1992May5.005813.281@eff.org> Date: Tue, 5 May 1992 00:58:13 GMT >From: burchell@cse.unl.edu (David Burchell) >Message-Id: <9205040334.AA04565@cse.unl.edu> >Subject: DN article >The following article appeared on page six of _The Daily Nebraskan_, >the student newspaper of the University of Nebraska - Lincoln, on >Friday, May 1, 1992. [David says this was posted with permission of the DN. - Carl] >Official says messages contained pornography >by Mike Lewis >Staff Reporter > Pornography was a factor in the UNL Computing Resource Center's >decision to stop supplying and entire hierarchy of USENET news groups >to UNL computers, the CRC director said Thursday. > Doug Gale said during an Academic Senate Computational >Services and Facilities Committee meeting that the material in some >of the alternative, or alt, groups was so bad, not even the adult >bookstores would carry it. And 99+% of it is not. > Some of the groups contained detailed information on how to >torture and mutilate people, Gale said, and neither CRC nor the >computational committee wanted to supply that information. If Mr. Gale wants this type of material banned, he should ban it in an open way. It should not be banned behind a smoke screen of resource limitations. It should not be banned behind close doors. It should not be banned by one man or woman. He might consider using procedure the University library used in deciding whether or not to buy _American Psycho_. [...] >. If UNL had continued to supply the alt groups, >and someone had complained to the federal government, [Gale said] >UNL would have >been required to prove that the groups met the criteria of the NSFNET >backbone service's acceptable use policy, Gale said. UNL must have >then provided proof immediately, or the Internet service would have >been turned off, he said. I do not believe that the National Science Foundation requires that Mr. Gale ban the alt groups. * (I think) he is confusing an incident involving an FTP archive (that can disrupt the Ne with lots of large file xfers) with Netnews. As best as I can piece it together, an anonymous ftp site called Mars Hotel (mars.ee.msstate.edu) had a GIF file archive with pictures of naked people. The archive generated complaints to the NSF. The NSF asked the admin about it. Rather than respond, the admin closed the archive down. So, the incident involved an ftp archive, not Netnews. Also, the NSF made no policy decision. My impression is that NSF would request a justification (not "proof") 2) that it would allow a reasonable time to formulate this justification (not "immediate"), 3) that if such justification was not possible, ceasing violation of the AUP would suffice (not "Internet service would have been turned off") * NSFnet policy has changed NSF policy changed recently. The new policy explicitly allows "(3) Communication and exchange ... to debate issues in a field or subfield of knowledge" also allowed is communications for professional development and to maintain currency in a field or subfield of knowledge. This would cover most all of the alt groups. The ONLY explicitly unacceptable uses are 1) for-profit activities and 2) extensive private or personal business Thousands of schools get the alt groups. This is no secret. The NSF doesn't object. [I'm enclosing the NSF AUP.] * Does UNL have to get alt groups via NSFNet? NSFNet is a backbone network; Netnews is usually passed from neighbor to neighbor. Has UNL tried to get a feed that doesn't use NSFNet? * Doesn't UNL get the alt groups now and then delete them on arrival? There is certainly no network policy that requires articles to be deleted on arrival. * What does any of this have to do with "alt" groups like alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk as contrasted with "rec" groups, "talk" groups, etc.? > By removing the alt groups now, Gale said, UNL forestalled such >a confrontation with the federal government. > Other universities that have had such confrontations "have >decided supporting pornography is not worth losing their Internet access," >Gale said. I wish I knew for sure what universities (if any) Mr. Gale is referring to and how that justifies removing newsgroups such as alt.censorship. I close with a quote from the recent _Rust v. Sullivan_ Supreme Court decision: "Similarly, we have recognized that the university is a traditional sphere of free expression so fundamental to the functioning of our society that the Government's ability to control speech within that sphere by means of conditions attached to the expenditure of Government funds is restricted by the vagueness and overbreadth doctrines of the First Amendment, Keyishian v. Board of Regents, 385 U. S. 589, 603, 605-606 (1967)." - Carl ============= ftp.eff.org:pub/academic/policies/nsf ======== THE NSFNET BACKBONE SERVICES ACCEPTABLE USE POLICY GENERAL PRINCIPLE: (1) NSFNET Backbone services are provided to support open research and education in and among US research and instructional institutions, plus research arms of for-profit firms when engaged in open scholarly communication and research. Use for other purposes is not acceptable. SPECIFICALLY ACCEPTABLE USES: (2) Communication with foreign researchers and educators in connection with research or instruction, as long as any network that the foreign user employs for such communication provides reciprocal access to US researchers and educators. (3) Communication and exchange for professional development, to maintain currency, or to debate issues in a field or subfield of knowledge. (4) Use for disciplinary-society, university-association, government-advisory, or standards activities related to the user's research and instructional activities. (5) Use in applying for or administering grants or contracts for research or instruction, but not for other fundraising or public relations activities. (6) Any other administrative communications or activities in direct support of research and instruction. (7) Announcements of new products or services for use in research or instruction, but not advertising of any kind. (8) Any traffic originating from a network of another member agency of the Federal Networking Council if the traffic meets the acceptable use policy of that agency. (9) Communication incidental to otherwise acceptable use, except for illegal or specifically unacceptable use. UNACCEPTABLE USES: (10) Use for for-profit activities (consulting for pay, sales or administration of campus stores, sale of tickets to sports events, and so on) or use by for-profit institutions unless covered by the General Principle or as a specifically acceptable use. (11) Extensive use for private or personal business. This statement applies to use of the the NSFNET Backbone only. NSF expects that connecting networks will formulate their own use policies. The NSF Division of Networking and Communications Research and Infrastructure will resolve any questions about this Policy or its interpretation. ============================================== ANNOTATED REFERENCES (All these documents are available on-line. Access information follows.) ================= law/rust-v-sullivan ================= The decision and decent for the so-called abortion information gag rule case. The decision explicitly mentions universities as a place where free expression is so important that gag rules would not be allowed. ================= ================= These documents are available by anonymous ftp (the preferred method) and by email. To get the files via ftp, do an anonymous ftp to ftp.eff.org (192.88.144.4), and get file(s): pub/academic/law/rust-v-sullivan To get the files my email, send email to archive-server@eff.org. Include the line(s) (be sure to include the space before the file name): send acad-freedom/law rust-v-sullivan -- Carl Kadie -- I do not represent EFF; this is just me. =kadie@eff.org, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu = ------------------------------ From caf-talk Caf May 4 00:00:00 1992 Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,alt.censorship From: kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie) Subject: Article 7--Critique of Turkish AUP (was "just read and think") Message-ID: <1992May4.223243.28741@eff.org> Date: Mon, 4 May 1992 22:32:43 GMT 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. >Organization: Middle East Technical University - Computer Center >Date: Tuesday, 4 Feb 1992 10:30:01 TUR >From: Kursat CAGILTAY >Message-ID: <92035.103001KURSAT@TRMETU.BITNET> >Newsgroups: metu.cc.news >Subject: Network RULES (Please read carefully !!!) > Rules of Network Usage > This article explains the rules for EARN Network Usage in METU > campus. This code of conduct has been established to remind users > of the intended purposes of EARN, in additon to clarify that EARN > should not be relied upon for transmission of confidential or > sensitive data because EARN can not guarantee its security. Users > found in violation of these rules and regulations will be held > accountable for their action. EARN and METUCC reserve the rights > to deny the use of the network to individuals found to be rules > explained below. > 1- An EARN user is a representative of METU, so, an extra care > must be taken while using the network resource. An important principle of academic freedom is that students and professors generally speak for themselves and not for their university. > If one behaves > against the rules METU or Republic of TURKEY, METU Computer > Center has the right of cancelling the user-id without noticing > the user and give the information to the judgement institutes. Expulsion from the network is a serious penality. Due process should be observed. This means, for example, that a users should have a right to a hearing and an appeal. > 2- Purpose of the network is to support academic and research > activities. So, using it for another activity is not allowed. >> deleted > 4- Listservs are powerful communication tools in academic life. > But some non-academic ones do exist. It has been reported that > some discussion against of METU and Republic of TURKEY take place > in some of these lists. Therefore, the ones taking place in these > discussion and against of METU and Republic of TURKEY will be > prosecuted. >>deleted > 6-2. Use of the network for political and religious activism is > forbidden. Contrast this with the beginning of the Joint Statement on Rights and Freedoms of Students: "Academic institutions exist for the transmission of knowledge, the pursuit of truth, the development of students, and the general well-being of society. Free inquiry and free expression are indispensable to the attainment of these goals. As members of the academic community, students should be encouraged to develop the capacity for critical judgment and to engage in a sustained and independent search for truth." And later, in the context of outside speakers: "The institutional control of campus facilities should not be used as a device of censorship." METU's policy is similar to a number of U.S. policies. For example, Iowa State University also bans "any message of ... political nature." The U. of Illinois's NCSA bans email that "attempts to disadvantage NCSA" The Computer Science department at the University of Texas forbids "messages that are ... patently offensive, or that ... demean ... individuals or groups, or that would otherwise bring discredit to the University or the Department." To the METU's credit, its policy is less vague than the U. of Illinois policy and, unlike these U.S. policies, it does not (to my knowledge) violate its nation's law. On the other hand, there are better policies. For example, the policy of the U.S.'s National Science Foundation Net explictly allows "(3) Communication and exchange for professional development, to maintain currency, or to debate issues in a field or subfield of knowledge." ANNOTATED REFERENCES (All these documents are available on-line. Access information follows.) ================= student.freedoms ================= Joint Statement on Rights and Freedoms of Students -- This is the main statement on student academic freedom. ================= policies/ethics.iastate.edu ================= The computer ethics statement for Iowa State University. critiqued ================= policies/ncsa.uiuc.edu ================= Email policy for the National Center for Supercomputer Applications, a department of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (Critiqued) ================= law/uwm-post-v-u-of-wisconsin ================= The full text of UWM POST v. U. of Wisconsin. This recent district court ruling goes into detail about the difference between protected offensive expression and illegal harassment. It even mentions email. It concludes: "The founding fathers of this nation produced a remarkable document in the Constitution but it was ratified only with the promise of the Bill of Rights. The First Amendment is central to our concept of freedom. The God-given "unalienable rights" that the infant nation rallied to in the Declaration of Independence can be preserved only if their application is rigorously analyzed. The problems of bigotry and discrimination sought to be addressed here are real and truly corrosive of the educational environment. But freedom of speech is almost absolute in our land and the only restriction the fighting words doctrine can abide is that based on the fear of violent reaction. Content-based prohibitions such as that in the UW Rule, however well intended, simply cannot survive the screening which our Constitution demands." ================= policies/nsf ================= The NSFNET backbone services acceptable use policy ================= ================= These documents are available by anonymous ftp (the preferred method) and by email. To get the files via ftp, do an anonymous ftp to ftp.eff.org (192.88.144.4), and get file(s): pub/academic/student.freedoms pub/academic/policies/ethics.iastate.edu pub/academic/policies/ncsa.uiuc.edu pub/academic/law/uwm-post-v-u-of-wisconsin pub/academic/policies/nsf To get the files my 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 student.freedoms send acad-freedom/policies ethics.iastate.edu send acad-freedom/policies ncsa.uiuc.edu send acad-freedom/law uwm-post-v-u-of-wisconsin send acad-freedom/policies nsf -- Carl Kadie -- I do not represent EFF; this is just me. =kadie@eff.org, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu = ------------------------------ From caf-talk Caf May 6 00:00:00 1992 Newsgroups: bit.listserv.pacs-l Date: Wed, 6 May 1992 10:11:10 CDT From: Public-Access Computer Systems Forum Subject: Article 8--Virginia Tech Electronic Village Message-ID: From: Bernie Sloan Subject: Virginia Tech "Electronic Village" There's an article in the May 6 issue of the Chronicle of Higher Educa- tion about a partnership between Virginia Tech and the Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Company (a Bell Atlantic Company) to study the feasi- bility of creating an "electronic village" in Blacksburg, Virginia (home of Virginia Tech). To quote the article: "If such an undertaking proves feasible, all homes, businesses, and schools in the town will be connected on a high speed electronic network....Those on the network will be able to use electronic mail, join online discussion groups, and take advantage of a wide range of business, educational, financial, and general communications services. They may also use the Internet..." It doesn't say exactly how this would be accomplished, but the involve- ment of the phone company makes it sound as if ISDN may be playing a role. Don't know if the concept is based on the Free-Net model, but it sounds like it could be similar. Granted this is in the feasibility-study stage, but a project like this could have very interesting implications for library and informa- tion services. The article, written by Beverly Watkins, does not specifically mention libraries, so it's not clear what roles the community's libraries are playing in this project. Bernie Sloan, Director Illinois Library Computer Systems Office axpbbgs@uicvmc -- Carl Kadie -- I do not represent EFF; this is just me. =kadie@eff.org, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu = ------------------------------ End of Computers and Academic Freedom News (Digest) ************************************