From: jaapjl@tab00.larc.nasa.gov (J Lee Jaap)
Subject: Re: NetNews Contract? NOT!
Organization: AS&M Inc
	<1992Sep1.010318.19818@cfctech.cfc.com> <23600@alice.att.com>
	<1992Sep1.154036.7765@porthos.cc.bellcore.com>
	<1992Sep02.011137.5510@anomaly.sbs.risc.net>
	<JAAPJL.92Sep2122017@cmb00.larc.nasa.gov>
	<1992Sep02.175346.17021@anomaly.sbs.risc.net>
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 22:03:12 GMT

kd1hz@anomaly.sbs.risc.net (Michael P. Deignan) writes:
   jaapjl@tab00.larc.nasa.gov (J Lee Jaap) writes:

   >What I'm saying is that the fact that a .ca site receives
   >Distribution: usa is not because some site ignored your specification;
   >it's because you used a tool that's not applicable to the purpose, if
   >you wanted to prevent this.

   I can tell my system here to ignore Distributions. Your articles don't
   get propagated.

I did not deny that you could.  Read my post again.

   >Computers are configured and used by humans, who can and do enter
   >implicit and explicit agreements by using the net.

   Individuals configuring computer systems may or may not have the authority
   to act as the computer-owner's agent in legal representation.

Perhaps.  But that's not my argument.

   >You accept the net's services when you post.

   "The net" is a non-entity.

I hope you never refer to such a non-entity as the net in daily conversation
except in hypotheticals.

   It can't offer me a service.

I think you're being pedantic here.  But I'll try to play the game too.

Implicit Definitions (made more explicit :) :

net - the collection of people who build, configure, and use network services
network services - various methods of transferring information between
	members of the net.  Examples are USENET News, various file
	transfer protocols, various mail protocols.  These work because
	the people constituting the net are people who believe their
	lives/jobs are enriched by the sharing beyond the cost of using
	the net, that we all end up richer in some way.

The net (people who build, configure, and use network services,
including your sysadmin) offer you the service of USENET news (for
example) to publish (or scatter or copy ...) your words throughout the
net (people who ...), but without any guarantees of delivery, etc.
(The net is no single legal entity here, because the courts have not
made very many (if any) rulings about the net, to result in legal
definitions.)

Should you choose to post, I would think that you expect something like
this to happen; otherwise, why post?  (Duh, there's this red button here;
I'll just push it to see what happens.)  Even if you don't understand
all the details of how it all works, this is a service offered by the
net that you accept by posting.  Again, why post?  (to feed your words
to the bit bucket?)

I don't know what you disagree with.  Maybe we're complaining about
each other's choice of words, with different sets of connotations and
different degrees of legalese.  `Agreement' vs. `contract' vs.
`expectation' vs. whatever.  I see implicit contracts arising out of
expectations and perceived services and choices to use said services.

What do you see?  Why do you post?
--
J Lee Jaap <J.L.Jaap@LaRC.NASA.Gov> +1 804/864-2148
employed by, not speaking for, AS&M Inc, at NASA LaRC, Hampton VA 23681-0001
Newsgroups: news.admin,misc.legal.computing