From: escheire@sunlab.cit.cornell.edu (Eric Scheirer)
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
Subject: Re: The FBI takes a trip to Cornell...
Date: 20 Nov 92 10:34:57 GMT
Organization: EFF mail-news gateway
Originator: daemon@eff.org


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!
Xref: sparky alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk:3404 comp.admin.policy:1505