HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: whheydt@pbhya.PacBell.COM (Wilson Heydt)
Subject: Re: Illegal photograph postings (was: Your police at work for y
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 23:32:23 GMT
Followup-To: poster

In article <1992Apr6.173729.17237@CERIS.Purdue.EDU>, jheath@CERIS.Purdue.EDU (Jim Heath) writes:
> From article <1992Apr5.212321.19972@porthos.cc.bellcore.com>, by whs70@dancer.uucp (24411-sohl):
> > Likewise, the courts did find SONY liabel, nor
> > did they "outlaw" VCRs because
> > they were being used to make illegal copies of movies.  In both
> > cases the court acknowledged that the "diskcopy software"
> > and VCRs could and were used in copyright infringing activities,
> > but they said that as long as non-infringing uses were involved,
> > they (the court) would not rule against their being available.
> 
> Let me get this straight, you put the lime in the coconut, oops
> wrong thought line.  Did they find Sony liable or not?  I thought
> not.  Didn't the ruling say that "time shifting" was ok? 

Sony won th ecase--which is not surprising.  A good 30 years earlier
it was found that taping radio programs off the air for personal use
fell under the 'fair use' portion of copyright law.  The same should
certainly apply to taping TV for personal use.  *However*, I can well
believe that the same cannot be said of copying any copyrighted work
and then distributing it far and wide.

	--Hal
-- 
=======================================================================
Hal Heydt                    |    Vegetarians eat vegetables.
Analyst, Pacific*Bell        |      
510-823-5447                 |    I'm a Humanitarian.
Xref: sparky comp.org.eff.talk:3342 rec.photo:6775 misc.legal:8928 alt.bbs:3335
From: yury@bknight.jpr.com (Yury German)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,rec.photo,misc.legal,alt.bbs
Subject: Re:  Illegal photograph postings (was: Your police at work for y
Distribution: world
Date: 4 Apr 92 18:32:43 GMT
Organization: Blue-Knight Productions

In article <56586@cup.portal.com> ts@cup.portal.com (Tim W Smith) writes:
>All they have to do is go for the biggest copiers.  Hit UUNET and a few
>of the big schools and a couple large companies with copyright infringement
>suits, and the connectivity of the picture groups will drop to near zero
>real fast.  Heck, the copyright owners probably wouldn't have to even
>bother with a suit -- a letter to UUNET's and the big school's and the
>big companies' lawyers would probably be enough.
	Not really all you would do is start people to start trading in
the mail on UUNET... and pirate BBS and FTP sites go up like crazy
distributing the same information. Now do not get me wrong I do not say
taht its leagal or uprove of it. Its just a big difference.

--

    _____________________________________________________________________
   |                                                                     |
   | Yury German                  yury@bknight or yury@bknight.jpr.com   |
   | Blue-Knight Productions      GENIE EMAIL: Blue-Knight               |
   | (212)218-1348                (Graphic Design and Video Productions) |
   | (718)321-0998		  P.O. Box 985, Queens, New York, 11354  |
   |_____________________________________________________________________|

Xref: sparky comp.org.eff.talk:3322 rec.photo:6702 misc.legal:8858 alt.bbs:3308
From: rock@lakes.trenton.sc.us (Rockerboy)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,rec.photo,misc.legal,alt.bbs
Subject: Re: Illegal photograph postings (was: Your police at work for y
Date: 6 Apr 92 07:31:28 GMT
Organization: The Greg Lake Fan Club

>   There's the very real possiblilty that an adv. agency could take
> something off the net today, sharpen it up using off the shelf software
> available today and use it in one of thier client's print ads for liquer
> or cars.
>   If everytime you open a Time, Newsweek, or Life magazine and see a
> liquer ad with your photograph there, *for the next 12 years* what would
> you do? You're left holding the bag, you created something, some folks
> are selling Millions of dollars of product and you didn't even get a case
> of Gin for your troubles. Sound fair to you? Not to me.

This is the first argument that I have heard on this topic that actually 
makes sense to me.  This is a very valid point.  But still, the usenet 
certainly doesn't seem to be the target of choice, as some of the more 
rabid people would suggest.  Target usenet, and you simply screw a lot of 
people out of the chance to participate as administrrators just freak out 
and dump everyone who isn't part of their business, etc.  The targets 
should be the abusers, not the medium or the small people.


"Sometimes what you say is going to fly right in the faces of the 
powerful people who really run this world, but you don't care...you know 
it's your place to challenge authority..."

                                          Rockerboy
From: zcakilh@ucl.ac.uk (Miss Chee Mei Yeoh)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Singapore
Summary: Networking in a authoritarian Society
Date: 12 Apr 92 04:45:49 GMT
Organization: University College London

(Kurt Cockrum) kurt@grogatch.celestial.com writes:
 
> [Singapore's installation of a nation-wide fiber optic network]
> probably had something to do with aiding the Public Rectitude Cadre
> in [its] ceaseless effort to root out the few remaining Recalcitrant
> Chewing Gum Devil Addicts shamelessly indulging their habits in their
> own [homes]. :-( It sure as hell ain't to get the citizens on Usenet/
> Internet.
 
How bad can Singapore be if its citizens can read comp.org.eff.talk? ;-)
As Kurt no doubt knows, it is not illegal to chew gum in Singapore.
I don't doubt that the prospects of Singapore's government carrying
alt.tasteless on a public network are nil :-) but to raise the spectre
of Big Brother is (way) off the mark. There is a great deal of useful
information that can be carried over a public network - a quality
newspaper, educational materials, library catalogues, stock market
information - to name but a few. Should the relative anarchy of something
such as usenet be carried? Well, I'd like that but I believe every
sensible person can see the formidable arguments against such a
course.
 
Nigel Yeoh, Kings College London quando@well.sf.ca.us
                                 zdtl123@oak.cc.kcl.ac.uk
 
ps. I hope and believe that when Kurt said that Singapore reminded him
    an Orwellian World ("I think of Prodigy crossed with the Analects
    of Confucius ... a sign-on logo of the smiling visage of Lee Kuan
    Yew with mouse ears"), he spoke in jest. In case he did not, I
    would like to tell him that (a) Singapore is much more open than
    her critics believe or will acknowledge, and (b) whilst there are
    clearly flaws in Singapore society [and important ones at that],
    many of them are 'necessary evils' caused by Singapore's position
    as a small developing nation; on the whole, I'm confident that the
    strengths of Singapore society far outweigh the disadvantages.
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: kadie@herodotus.cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: Re: Lone Star Comics (store in Dallas) bans "Hackers"
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 18:21:16 GMT

MCMASTER@LSTC2VM.stortek.com (Jim McMaster) writes:

[...]
>Besides, what makes you think the owner is deciding what's good for
>you?  Maybe he does not think it will sell, or he fears legal action?
[...]

What legal action? This is still a (mostly) free country.

- Carl

--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: jkogan@eff.org (Julia Kogan)
Subject: Re: Commercial lines?
Originator: jkogan@eff.org
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 11:39:18 GMT

In article <wmVRiB4w164w@batpad.lgb.CA.US> mike@batpad.lgb.CA.US (Mike Batchelor) writes:
>entropy@wintermute.WPI.EDU (Lawrence C. Foard) writes:
>> I just bought a load of old modems off WPI and now have everything I need
>> to start a multi-user BBS except for the phone lines. What I'm wondering is
>> what kind of phone lines you are supposed to order? Does charging for use
>> mean that you have to get business lines? Under what conditions can you get
>> normal non business lines?
>You can usually get residential lines if you don't give the phone
>company any indication that you are charging your users.  

You realize, of course, that if the phone company begins to discover that
sysops are charging their users yet paying only residential rates, then
they will begin to charge business rates to all BBSs.  This seems to be
the trend in some states.  More on this later in the week.
-- 
Julia Kogan                     |  These opinions are not my employer's,
jkogan@eff.org                  |  nor are they legal advice.
Boston University School of Law |   
Xref: sparky comp.org.eff.talk:3437 alt.gopher:341 comp.archives.admin:303
From: bei@dogface.austin.tx.us (Bob Izenberg)
Subject: Re: Commercial lines?
Organization: The Fortress of Ultimate Dorkiness
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1992 08:52:55 GMT

In article <35003@nntpd.lkg.dec.com> herbison@erlang.enet.dec.com writes:

>If you don't like the tarrifs for phone lines, complain to the PUC
>or to your legislators.

Do you live in a state where the PUC will stand up to its local telco?  I
don't.

Bob
-- 
         "I didn't make that decision!  I only approved that decision!"
 ==============================================================================
 DOMAIN-WISE: bei@dogface.austin.tx.us  BANG-WISE: ...cs.utexas.edu!dogface!bei
 ==============================================================================
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: MCMASTER@LSTC2VM.stortek.com (Jim McMaster)
Subject: Re: Lone Star Comics (store in Dallas) bans "Hackers"
Organization: StorageTek SW Engineering
Date: Sun, 5 Apr 1992 20:30:10 GMT

In article <1992Apr3.170338.14490@m2.dseg.ti.com>
jmellby@iluvatar.dseg.ti.com (John R. Mellby) writes:
 
>NOW I'm annoyed.  The local (Dallas-Ft. Worth area) Science Fiction store,
>Lone Star Comics, is owned by Buddy Saunders.
>Now I feel he has gone too far.  Steve Jackson Games brought out
>a game (shown further below) called "Hackers".
>
>Buddy Saunders has decided that Lone Star Comics will not carry the
>game.
>
>John R. Mellby                       Texas Instruments
Why are you so bothered?  He is a private businessman, and has chosen
not to stock a product.  People can buy it somewhere else.  You have no
right to pressure him into stocking this stupid-sounding (IMO) game.
 
Jim McMaster
From: brad@clarinet.com (Brad Templeton)
Subject: Re: Illegal photograph postings (was: Your police at work for y
Organization: ClariNet Communications Corp.
Date: Tue, 07 Apr 1992 07:22:20 GMT

In article <1992Apr6.233130.14182@msen.com> emv@msen.com (Edward Vielmetti) writes:
>>Brad Templeton, ClariNet Communications Corp. -- Sunnyvale, CA 408/296-0366
>
>Oh yeah, I'd bust up ClariNet too -- you have to be guilty of having
>violated some US law at some time, I'll bet...

Interestingly enough, in the eyes of some cops we have a special status
of sorts, because we call ourselves an electronic newspaper.   At
Computers Freedom and Privacy we had some panels with computer crime cops
and the one I asked said he wouldn't touch my machine unless the
circumstances were extreme.  Shutting down news services (if you don't
get them all) is remarkably bad press.
-- 
Brad Templeton, ClariNet Communications Corp. -- Sunnyvale, CA 408/296-0366
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: rita@eff.org (Rita Marie Rouvalis)
Subject: Re: WHERE THE HELL IS EFF??!?!?!?
Originator: rita@eff.org
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 1992 18:12:41 GMT

	Well, physically, last week we were all at Computers, Freedom,
and Privacy II.  Virtually, I've been hanging out on CompuServe
assisting Gerard in getting our forum started up.

	All members will be getting a newsletter in the next few
weeks that'll bring you more up to date.  I guess I should go write it
now.

Rita


-- 
Rita Marie Rouvalis              rita@eff.org 
Electronic Frontier Foundation   | We make out of the quarrel with others,
155 Second Street                | rhetoric, but of the quarrel with 
Cambridge, MA 02141 617-864-0665 | ourselves, poetry.  -- W.B. Yeats
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: Peter A. Cohen <peterco@eff.org>
Subject: Re: Your police at work for you!
Organization: ON Technology, Inc.
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1a2
     <1992Mar20.171111.9675@wpi.WPI.EDU> <41338@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>
     <1992Mar20.172151.23362@rtsg.mot.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1992 23:37:20 GMT



In article  Dan J. Declerck, declrckd@rtsg.mot.com writes:

>Hmmm... I think police departments need education to remove their 
>computer hobbyist "bigotry" before a wonderful hobby goes down
>in flames because of public misperception.

Gee, wouldn't be the first time.

- Peter

"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre
minds." - A. Einstein
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,rec.photo,misc.legal,alt.bbs
From: brad@clarinet.com (Brad Templeton)
Subject: Re: Illegal photograph postings (was: Your police at work for y
Organization: ClariNet Communications Corp.
Date: Mon, 06 Apr 1992 07:41:26 GMT

It would be extremely difficult to shut down USENET directly.

It would be easy to emaciate it with just a few threats, however.
You attack not the links, not the network, but the individual big
companies on it.

"Sites that get government grants or contracts shalt not network on USENET"
is a rule the government could make without even bothering to pass any
law banning the network, and the network would be quickly reduced form
the world's biggest conferencing system to something smaller than BIX.

(At least within the USA.)
-- 
Brad Templeton, ClariNet Communications Corp. -- Sunnyvale, CA 408/296-0366
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: Peter A. Cohen <peterco@eff.org>
Subject: Re: Your police at work for you!
Organization: ON Technology, Inc.
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1a2
     <41714@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> <1992Mar24.200257.14421@eff.org>
     <1992Mar26.003222.6471@mjbtn.jobsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1992 17:19:45 GMT

In article  Winfield S. Heagy, wsh@mjbtn.jobsoft.com writes:

>Predjudice and bigotry can easily stem from a lack of understanding 
>or education.  Which do you think best describes our 'law'
>enforcement?  Both?

I think it varies widely.  Law enforcement agencies are just made up of
the eligible candidates of the local community.  If a law enforcement
agency in Fresno makes a somewhat hysterical and misleading press
announcement, it reflects negatively upon that community.

We have a tendency toward viewing anything we see in print or on video as
facts, rather than opinions.  We also have a tendency to exaggerate the
problem, as well.

What can we do about it, though?  The Fresno police department raises a
very valid point- such technology does open children to the possibility
of risk. The Lexington, MA case that Rita pointed out is a prime example
of the dangers.  When I was a youth with a modem (I got my first modem
about seven years ago, when I was fifteen) I would receive propositions
or indecent proposals from BBS users who called themselves gay or bi
males.  Any woman who has used a modem has undoubtedly had probably had
similar experiences.  The cops are right, even if they're adding a bit of
misinformation.

- Peter
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: tk0jut1@mp.cs.niu.edu (jim thomas)
Subject: Re: Police and modem users
Organization: Northern Illinois University
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 02:43:41 GMT

In article <15907.29E9A2D7@puddle.fidonet.org> Joshua.Lee@f542.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Joshua Lee) writes:

>The police regularly set up BBSs to track illegal activity. Also several
>law enforcement, other agencies in the government, and telecom security
>run networked BBSs or monitor BBS networks.
 
For those who try to keep tabs of such things, could you identify
some of these "regularly set up" BBSs (or provide pointers to same)?
 
>It's when they bring out press releases like the ones posted here
>that make it seem like BBSs as a whole are hotbeds of criminal activity
>and vice that it becomes a serious problem.
 
The Fresno press release seems to have been more the product of an
over-zealous PIO writer than the investigating officers, but your point
is valid. The hypbole of LE agents during from the "Bill Cook" and
Sun Devil cases two years ago fed the feeding frenzy of the media.
Tonight, CNBC did a segment linking BBSs to snuff films, kiddie-porn, and
massive degeneracy without fully explaining what BBSs are. If I were a parent
and saw the program, then discovered that my kidling were on a BBS, I would
panic. If anybody taped the segment, please contact me email.
 
Jim Thomas




Xref: sparky comp.org.eff.talk:3329 rec.photo:6719 misc.legal:8884 alt.bbs:3316
From: rcb@ncsu.edu (Randy Buckland)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,rec.photo,misc.legal,alt.bbs
Subject: Re: Ways of chilling or banning Usenet(was Re: Illegal photograph postings)
Date: 6 Apr 92 17:06:23 GMT
Organization: North Carolina State University

jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala) writes:
>...  Perhaps it could be implemented by requiring reporting of
>editors responsible for the contents of any public electronic forums,
>...

If I was providing a public electronic forum that handled any reasonable
amount of traffic, and the above law passed, I would have to close down
the forum since the effort to edit all materials in it would be too great.
Of course, that may be exactly what you want...
--
Randy Buckland						"It's hard to work
North Carolina State University				in a group when you're
randy_buckland@ncsu.edu (919) 515-5491			omnipotent"	-- Q
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: Peter A. Cohen <peterco@eff.org>
Subject: Re: Illegal photograph postings (was: Your police at work for
     you!)
Organization: ON Technology, Inc.
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1a2
     <1992Mar26.060845.6609@talon.ucs.orst.edu>
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1992 17:26:46 GMT

In article  Max Cray, max@underg.UUCP writes:

>I vote *NO* to the concept of copyrights.

Well, I salute and appreciate your spirit, but not your sense of reality.
 In a perfect society, we wouldn't need copyrights.  Everyone would
respect everyone else's ownership, and not intrude upon it.  Since we
don't live in such a libertarian utopia, we need to protect ourselves
from the avarice and greed of others...

- Peter

+----------------------------------+
| Copyrighted 1992, Peter A. Cohen |
+----------------------------------+
From: jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: Moscow hunting "illegal" modems
Date: 11 Apr 92 08:42:32 GMT
Reply-To: jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala)
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland

In article <14579.29E52890@puddle.fidonet.org>, Joe.DeLassus@f355 (Joe DeLassus) writes:
> Follows the translation of the article by Kirill Maslentsin published
>by the Moscow Weekly Commersant.
>
> -== start of text ==-
>
> Starting from April 1st, the Commercial Service of the Moscow City
>Telephone Network (Proizvodstvennoe Ob'edinenie MGTS) will detect the
>unregistered modems. The experts doubt that this action, objectively
>necessary, is manageable to be carried out quickly, because the
>Commercial Service of the MGTS finds itself yet in the organizational
>stage.

So, is this an April fool's joke or isn't it?  In the modern
rapdily-changing world it's really hard to separate reality and
fiction.  This one doesn't appear strange enough to be reality, so
I suspect it's fiction.  Anyone?

//Jyrki
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,alt.activism
From: Joshua.Lee@f542.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Joshua Lee)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: Illegal photograph postings (was: Your police at work for you!)
Date: 10 Apr 92 11:48:59 GMT
Organization: FidoNet node 1:109/542 - Confuscious Max, Temple Hills MD

In a message of <Apr 08 01:23> Andrew Christian Haas (1:105/42) writes:

 ACH>  phone lines to the net computer in the next town over. So there 
 ACH> wasn't the high cost of dedicated lines and such that must be 
 ACH> inherent in Internet.

 ACH>  There wasn't the high speed, either; but now with high speed 
 ACH> modems such a possibility of a low-cost fairly high-speed net 

There's a 16,000 node free BBS network transfering 5-10 megs of conference
mail per day on a $3-500 14.4K modem backbone called FidoNet, so it's a bit
more than a possibility. :-) Most areas have 10-100 free BBS systems on
it, it's fairly universally available, and even with easy newsreader type
methods of handling it, such as offline readers, universally ignored, tho
I guess if universally ignored means 10 megs o' mail a day, we're in
trouble if people start noticing it. ;-)

Tom Jennings, FidoNet's founder, one an EFF Pioneer award this year.

Almost forgot that this wasn't just a FidoNet conference, and is gated 
to y'all mainframe guys on Usenet too. :-)

I've looked up the Santa Cruz area, I'll send you a list of what I
think's the proper nodelist segment for your area, let me know if
these aren't a local call, and I'll see if I can find the right
ones then.

--
ArfaNet: Joshua.Lee@f542.n109.z1.fidonet.org
FidoNet: Joshua Lee on 1:109/542
MaBellNet: (301) 702-9467 (BBS)


--  
uucp: uunet!m2xenix!puddle!109!542!Joshua.Lee
Internet: Joshua.Lee@f542.n109.z1.fidonet.org
From: rop@hacktic.nl (Rop Gonggrijp)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: Privacy on Novell Lans
Date: 11 Apr 92 14:18:16 GMT

00bestrawser@bsu-ucs.uucp (Bryan Strawser) writes:

>Problem we're having:
>
>      At least two faculty members have access to a program for the
>      network known as LAN ASSIST.  This program allows them to do
>      several functions, such as:
>[...]

The Lan Assist program has a feature to tell on the watched machine who is
watching. In this case the name of the viewer is flashing in the top-right
corner if the screen. This feature can be turned off however.

You can also just hack system supervisor level on the network (easy on
Novell) and just watch them! Anything they do to you, with a little
imagination, can be done to them!

----

  Rop Gonggrijp (rop@hacktic.nl), editor of        | fax:   +31 20 6900968
  Hack-Tic Magazine (only on paper, only in Dutch) | VMB:   +31 20 6001480
From: Bill.Hartwell@p0.f99.n121.z1.fidonet.org (Bill Hartwell)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: Police and modem users
Date: 9 Apr 92 17:42:41 GMT
Organization: FidoNet node 1:121/99.0 - NineJackNine, Madison WI


 -=> Quoting Jerry Andrews  jandrews@btr.com to All <=-

 BH> The ones who DO have the time, energy, or interest tend to be either
 BH> members of PoliceNet, or to be setting up scams like that "bbs" scam a
 BH> few months ago.
 JAj> 
 JAj> I tried tracking this down.  "bbs" scam?

It was in the papers here.....apparently, some police department set up
a bulletin board for the express purpose of entrapping people they
thought might be publishing kiddie porn.  It was supposed to be a major
"sting" operation, but (at least, according to what I read in the paper)
it only netted a few people.


... For secret file-filled "Pirate section" Press <Ctrl><Alt><Del> Now!

--  
uucp: uunet!m2xenix!puddle!121!99.0!Bill.Hartwell
Internet: Bill.Hartwell@p0.f99.n121.z1.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,rec.photo,misc.legal,alt.bbs