HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: romain@salt.eng.pyramid.com (Romain Kang)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: Re: UUCP newsfeed from NNTP?
Date: 10 Sep 1992 02:06:37 GMT
Organization: Pyramid Technology Corp, San Jose, CA
Reply-To: romain@pyramid.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: salt.eng.pyramid.com
Originator: romain@salt.eng.pyramid.com

In <1992Sep5.032555.2584@u.washington.edu> Sean T. Lamont writes:
| I would like to know if it's possible to make an internet host without an
| actual usenet database be set up to feed usenet articles to a UUCP host
| using UUCP and NNTP protocols.

It sounds like you only need to read.  If I understand your question,
you want something like this:

	 "LARRY"	  "MOE"		 "CURLY"
	NNTP server ==> NNTP client
			UUCP server ==>	UUCP client

There is lots of free software that can be customized for your purpose.

An easy way to do this would take Jon Zeeff's batching nntpxfer and
hack it to pipe incoming news to an appropriate uux command instead of
rnews.  You probably can remove the history file hooks, since it sounds
like CURLY won't have any other feeds.  The Path:  header may make it
look like CURLY has an Official Feed from the LARRY, but that isn't a
big deal.

If flow control might be a problem (i.e., disk space on MOE) then
you will want to maintain a history file somewhere to avoid sending
duplicate articles to the downstream site.  In this case, you might
also feed the NNTP articles through one of the freely available UUCP
batcher programs.

Caution: INN's current NEWNEWS implementation is quite slow; you
probably shouldn't pound your friendly neighborhood server, lest
they become unfriendly.

If you need to post as well, it should be fairly easy for MOE
to support a custom rnews (based on the NNTP mini-inews).
Newsgroups: news.admin
From: kadie@herodotus.cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: Re: "Computers graphic when it comes to porn"
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 01:53:06 GMT

clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis) writes:

[...]
>Besides, where was the censorship?  Neither Zundel nor Keegstra were
>ever actually muzzled.
[...]

So punishment after the fact doesn't muzzle speech?

- Carl

--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Xref: sparky news.admin:7603 alt.fan.john-palmer:361
From: peters@beltrix.guild.org (Peter Sleggs)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: Re: Sadistic, Automated, or Rabid map administrator.
Keywords: Belgium maps
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 92 22:06:04 EDT
Organization: Bellatrix Systems Corp., Mississauga, ONT Canada

mps@winneshk.hawkeye.com (Michael Snyder) writes:

> There seems to be an automated (or rabid?) map administrator out there in
> Belgium.  I have complained privately via email to the map administrators
> concerning repeated unnecessary reception of the Belgium maps, and received
> replies from two map administrators indicating:
> 
> MA#1: If a map is in a state of change, like when an area is first mapped,
> there may be many transmissions of the map file in question.
> 
> MA#2: If you don't like it, don't take comp.mail.maps and get the maps
> when you like from a tar'd file of all maps.
> 
> I can agree totally with MA#1, and understand that if changes are made,
> then the map should be put out ASAP.

Stuff deleted

> Now, by my count, 66% of what has been sent by the Belgium map administrator
> is sent for the sake of sending it.  No changes are present, except for the
> cosmetic change to the Last-updated date line.
> 
> At the risk of repeating myself, I DO NOT MIND GETTING MAP UPDATES IF
> THERE IS TRULY NEW INFORMATION IN THEM!  Does anyone else see what I'm
> complaining about?  Should I track this for a month, and post the results
> then?  Does anybody care?
> 
> Michael Snyder

I had noticed - but dont they originate from an account at rutgers, or
is it an automated approval process ?

here are the headers from my almost daily dose...
From: uucpmap@rutgers.rutgers.edu (UUCP Mapping Project)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.maps
Subject: UUCP map for u.bel.0
Date: 12 Sep 92 14:48:20 GMT
Expires: 27 Oct 92 14:48:20 GMT
Supersedes: <Sep.11.10.52.41.1992.7020@rutgers.rutgers.edu>

Why are these approved ? Do the originators have nothing better to do
with their time ?

I have been wondering about this myself since the maps first started
arriving here a couple of months ago.

--
Bellatrix Systems Corp. Mississauga, Ontario Canada
peters@beltrix.guild.org or beltrix!peters
From: hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M. Hartman)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: Re: Why we need a "Copyright: " field (was: Re: NetNews/CD . . .)
Date: 14 Sep 92 18:12:55 GMT
Organization: negligable

In article <1992Sep9.191809.5442@wolves.uucp> news@wolves.uucp (The Wolfe of the Den) writes:
>For an electronic item, the "original" is the temporally "first" storage
>of the work in the electronic medium.

Which may reside solely in the RAM, or /tmp directory until it is
submitted to/by News for distribution.  Actually, this system records 
the article as $HOME/.article -- which is overwritten almost immediately 
once I reply to another article.

I keep no "original" -- the sole existance of this article is distributed
throughout Usenet, and I defy anyone to make a determination that any
copy is more or less valid than any other.

In truth what we have here is a "virtual document" -- where many
instances exist -- all of which are (by default) copyright -- but
no "original" per se.  Or we could say that the "virtual document"
is itself copyrighted, which copyright would apply to any instance
thereof.

However you wish to view it, no original remains, yet I retain
my rights to say "you can't take a copy and use it for your own
purposes without permission".

What we have here is *not* covered by existing copyright language,
due to the "automatic" nature of the distribution mechanism.  It
combines authoring and publishing in one step, which has not previously
existed (note the relative nature of the term "previously" -- the
gov't hasn't gotten around to making laws about it, therefore there
is no legal precedent, therefore "has not previously existed" for
all practical, legal purposes).

I do think that any copyright would be upheld in court, but I am 
attempting to point out that the whole idea of Usenet articles is
one which the law does not yet acknowledge.

Again, I think the best model for Usenet is a single "virtual location"
wherein the articles can be said to reside.  The individual specific
machines become immaterial for legal purposes.  Any use beyond the
confines of "Usenet" (distribution as defined by the RFD specs) would
then be open to prosecution.  But any unintended distribution that 
happens to conform to the specs would not be.  (It would be equivilant
to leaving your window open when you didn't want it open.  Someone can
read the book you left open on the coffee table....)

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Philosopher and plowman			|
each must know his part			|	-Richard Hartman	
to build a new mentality		|	hartman@uLogic.COM
closer to the heart!			|

Newsgroups: news.admin
From: kdenning@portal.hq.videocart.com (Karl Denninger)
Subject: Books on the Internet?
Organization: VideOcart Inc.
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 21:27:53 GMT

This may be the wrong place to put this, but I don't know where else to put
it :-)

I am looking for a published book, whether FTPable or something you buy in a
store, which covers user-level Internet services.  The common stuff needs to
be in here -- how to telnet, ftp, archie, gopher, mail, trn, etc.  

Does such a thing exist?  If so, any pointers?

We have lots of people here who want to learn, and only a few gurus.  Being
able to stretch our gurus with printed words would help immensely.

--
Karl Denninger 		Inet:  kdenning@hq.videocart.com
VideOcart Inc.		Voice: (312) 987-5022
Newsgroups: news.admin,misc.legal.computing
From: whs70@dancer.uucp (22501-sohl)
Subject: Re: NetNews Contract? NOT!
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 92 02:22:33 GMT

In article <1992Sep07.120826.8331@anomaly.sbs.risc.net> kd1hz@anomaly.sbs.risc.net (Michael P. Deignan) writes:
>whs70@dancer.uucp (22501-sohl) writes:
>
>>I have yet to work for any company where the receiving department does
>>anything more than deliver the incoming goods to the address within
>>the company.
>
>You simply haven't worked for the right companies. Yes - sometimes the
>scenario you describe is easier - but when you have a company of 300+
>individuals, and a box which arrives from "Paul Revere Horse Manure, Inc."
>not labelled to someone's attention, you'd better have a way of knowing
>where that box goes. Hence, receiving departments routinely get copies of
>P.O.s, and only material for which they can find a P.O. is delivered - the
>remainder is returned on the next truck.

That is not what you said/claimed in your post.  You said the receiving
department would most likely return goods that were ordered because
the person ordering them wasn't authorized.  That's significantly different
from returning goods that the receiving department can't identify the
intended recipient within the company.  

>>Having been a part of it (corporate 
America) for 20 plus years, yes, I think I have a
>>pretty good idea at the scope of authority that flows/attaches/is
>>granted to/ or is implied with many different job titles.
>
>Bellcore != Corporate.America

You conclude from my sig that I have only worked for Bellcore
in those 20+ years.  Try again....IBM, US Navy (I know, it's noy
corporate America, but it is another area of ordering and receiving 
goods), AT&T, Bellcore.

>>No, since the fundamental issue here is the claim by some that
>>USENet sites violate a poster's copyright distribution restrictions,
>>I think it is incombent on those that make such a claim to prove
>>their case.
>
>Funny, I've spent the past week discussing Law of Contracts, not NetNews
>copyrights. What discussion were you in on?

But that is the issue which has lead to this area of discussion
and the "implied contract" scenario is one counter argument to
the copyright debale/issue.

If all we are discussing is basic contract law outside the specifc area
of the network/USENet then this discussion should probably move to
misc.legal.

Standard Disclaimer- Any opinions, etc. are mine and NOT my employer's.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Sohl (K2UNK) BELLCORE (Bell Communications Research, Inc.)
Morristown, NJ             email via UUCP      bcr!dancer!whs70
201-829-2879 Weekdays      email via Internet  whs70@dancer.cc.bellcore.com
Xref: sparky news.admin:7606 news.admin.policy:19 misc.legal:17236
From: gwh@soda.berkeley.edu (George William Herbert)
Newsgroups: news.admin,news.admin.policy,misc.legal
Subject: Re: Herbert violating US Constitution.
Date: 15 Sep 1992 20:09:14 GMT
Organization: Dis-
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: soda.berkeley.edu
Summary: Wanted: good libel attorney in Minnesota

Wanted: civil attorney located in Minnesota, experienced in plaintiff's
	side of libel cases.

	Bonuses would include familiarity with electronic media and law,
willingness to take case on percentage of recovery basis, and being an
ethnic armenian.

	email replies to gwh@soda.berkeley.edu or gwh@lurnix.com please.

	Thanks


   -george william herbert
   gwh@soda.berkeley.edu  gwh@lurnix.com 

Newsgroups: news.admin
From: larry@gator.rn.com (Larry Snyder)
Subject: Re: usenet TOP 1000 sites
Organization: The Gator Public Access Unix Site - 219-289-3745
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 13:45:22 GMT

rbt@tous.oau.org (Robert B. Tate) writes:

>In article <BuKI49.A9z@gator.rn.com> larry@gator.rn.com (Larry Snyder) writes:
>>Did anyone this month receive a complete copy of the usenet TOP 1000 sites list?
>>
>>If so, would you please email it to me?
>>
>>-- 
>>Larry Snyder                                    internet: larry@gator.rn.com
>>keeper of the Gator                                  uucp: uunet!gator!larry

>Haven't you heard, the end of the net that everyone has been predicting
>for so long has finely happend and there wasen't anyone in the top 1000
>this month!

seriously, did you get the top 1000 list there?
-- 
Larry Snyder                                    internet: larry@gator.rn.com
keeper of the Gator                                  uucp: uunet!gator!larry
From: hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M. Hartman)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: Re: Why we need a "Copyright: " field (was: Re: NetNews/CD . . .)
Date: 8 Sep 92 16:58:01 GMT
Organization: negligable


 In article <1992Sep4.165554.9771@wolves.uucp> news@wolves.uucp (The Wolfe of the Den) writes:
 >In article <252@ulogic.UUCP> hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M. Hartman) writes:
 >>
 >>In article <1992Aug31.011750.7340@wolves.uucp> news@wolves.uucp (The Wolfe of the Den) writes:
 >>>	The *law* is that copyright exists on a work fixed in a tangible
 >>>medium. period.  Adding copyright headers or some other "quick fix" will
 >>>not work since there is no way to enforce the adoption of the headers or
 >>>the "sanctity" of their contents.
 >>
 >>Has anyone yet resolved the question of whether USENET has been established
 >>to be a "tangible medium"?
 >
 >Magnetic flux changes stored in/on electromagnetic devices have been
 >established legally as a "tangible medium", this includes the electronic
 >memory systems of a computer system, whether those memory systems be
 >permanent or volatile.  (I believe this was a side effect of one of the
 >various cases of copying computer game cartridges.  One of the Nintendo
 >vs. everyone else cases :-)

Yes, but the article exists on multiple electromagnetic storage
devices simultaneously, so my question is whether there is an
"original" of the work beyond which it can be said that "this is
an authorized/unauthorized copy"?


		-Richard Hartman
		hartman@uLogic.COM

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
"Ideas are not responsible for the people who believe them."
From: larry@gator.rn.com (Larry Snyder)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: usenet TOP 1000 sites
Date: 14 Sep 92 12:16:56 GMT
Organization: The Gator Public Access Unix Site - 219-289-3745

Did anyone this month receive a complete copy of the usenet TOP 1000 sites list?

If so, would you please email it to me?

-- 
Larry Snyder                                    internet: larry@gator.rn.com
keeper of the Gator                                  uucp: uunet!gator!larry
Newsgroups: news.admin
From: visser@convex.com (Lance Visser)
Subject: Re: Inappropriate Ethnic Crossposting (was: Only one in ten "Sipas" called up to join the Greek navy can swim.)
Organization: CONVEX Computer Corporation, Richardson, Tx., USA
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 05:02:16 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In <948@hawkeye.hawkeye.com> mps@hawkeye.hawkeye.com (Michael Snyder) writes:

>The context of this followup is from a reader of news.admin.

+>From article <9209032148.A6735XV@zuma.UUCP>, by sera@zuma.UUCP (Serdar Argic):


+>Who has seen "Blazing Saddles"?  Remember the fight scene in Rock Ridge
+>which spilled over into a closed-set musical, the commissary (sp?), and
+>into the streets?

+>Well, this stuff is now spilling all over from the ethnic pick-and harass
+>groups that everyone is bitching about.  What relevance does non-swimming
+>Greek sailors have to do with administering news systems?

	soc.culture.europe and soc.history have been drowning in this
stuff for months and months.  The relivence of much of the material
to one or both groups is very questionable.	

	The only answer the readers of either group have received in regard
to what to do about these people is to set up kill files.  I suppose if
kill files are good enough for soc.history, then it should be 
all the readers of news.admin as well.




+>News administrators, is it time yet to yank these people into line?  And
+>before Dave Hayes starts spewing the particular brand of EXTREME-LIBERAL-
+>RIGHTS-TO-SAY-ANYTHING he is famous for, let me say that I AGREE WITH YOU.
+>These people can say anything about anyone they wish; it just doesn't belong
+>in news.admin.  These people are driving the wrong way on a one-way street.



+>I do believe that Mutlu et al. have the right to say anything they wish.
+>I DO NOT believe that Mutlu et al. have the right to inflict their views
+>in inappropriate groups.

	Multu is probably not one person but a group of people posting under
that name.  They have recently abandoned the "Multu" name for that of
Serdar Argic and they are posting from a site (zuma.uucp) whic
(as far as I can tell) does not exist.



	If there is anyone out there who can figure out who is really 
posting under the name of Serdar Argic and what site they are originating
from, I think that the few people in the various groups 
(i.e. soc.history) who would find the information very useful in the
battle to push all the ethnic threads back into 1-3 appropriate groups.





Newsgroups: news.admin,misc.legal.computing
From: whs70@dancer.uucp (22501-sohl)
Subject: Re: NetNews Contract? NOT!
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 03:40:20 GMT

In article <1992Sep7.012059.5633@wolves.uucp> news@wolves.uucp (The Wolfe of the Den) writes:
>We finally see (after too much drivel) that Mr. Ford is suffering under
>the model of the implied contract as giving the site owner "permission"
>to perform a copying operation.
>
>This has been settled previously.  It only works under the limited case
>of the poster's being the originating author of the work in question.
>Your contract and model still doesn't relieve the site owner of the
>liability of contributory negligence when some poster violates someone
>else's copyrights, trade secrets or other property rights.

I can't speak for Mr. Ford (although I think he'll agree), that none
of us that have been arguing either the command model or the implied
copying contract scenario have said there is no copyright violation
if someone posts another author's work without that author's
permission.  I do not think, however, that the network bears any
liability for such acts and that in such cases, it would only be
the poster that would be found guilty of any criminal and/or
civil copyright violation.

Standard Disclaimer- Any opinions, etc. are mine and NOT my employer's.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Sohl (K2UNK) BELLCORE (Bell Communications Research, Inc.)
Morristown, NJ             email via UUCP      bcr!dancer!whs70
201-829-2879 Weekdays      email via Internet  whs70@dancer.cc.bellcore.com
Newsgroups: news.admin.technical,news.software.b,news.software.readers
From: karrer@bernina.ethz.ch (Andreas Karrer)
Subject: Re: NFS vs NNTP for news reading
Organization: Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH), Zurich, CH
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 14:34:40 GMT

axs@cs.bham.ac.uk (Aaron Sloman) writes:

>simmdan@ux1.isu.edu = ted@telematics.com (Ted Goldblatt) writes:

>> Is it the sense of the net (:-)) that having the news server
>> feed the news readers via nntp is preferable to feeding via
>> (read only) exported NFS filesystems, or vice versa?

>One problem with nntp is that it provides only a limited set of ways
>of accessing the news directories. For some users it is important to
>be able to apply any Unix utility (e.g. grep) to news files. Cross
>mounting disks via NFS makes this possible.

It also makes it possible for someone to run a "find /usr/spool/news ..."
on your news spool. Just watch that load average go up.

Most Mac/PC newsreaders cannot use NFS.

I export the trn and nn databases read-only to those users who run trn
or nn, and tell them not to run mthreads or nnmaster -- until some
consensus is reached on how thread information should be presented by
the nntp server (will there ever?). everything else goes thru NNTP.

+-----------
  Andi Karrer, Communication Systems, ETH Zuerich, Switzerland
  karrer@bernina.ethz.ch    - Objects in mirror are closer than they appear
Newsgroups: news.admin.technical
From: shuvam@cse.iitb.ernet.in (Shuvam Misra)
Subject: Re: Path: headers and small networks
Keywords: path news admin
Organization: Dept of Computer Science, IIT Bombay
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 14:19:09 GMT

In article <Bu7y4o.6s6@ux1.isu.edu> rhys@cs.uq.oz.au writes:
|   
|   Here's a technical question related to small networks in the outer regions
|   of USENET: is it a good idea to modify Path: headers as they pass out of
|   the small net into the world at large?

				[...]

How exactly does the news software look at "Path:" headers and prevent loops
in the feeding of articles?

|   not entering.  Hopefully this will prevent another UUCP site with the name
|   "hosta" or "hostb" missing our news....

Why doesn't the news software just look at the first component of the path,
and match that with the list of outgoing feeds? I know the obvious answer:
that way, you don't get to prevent multi-hop loops. But even that can be
stopped by adopting a related mechanism: when I get an article which I've
already received, I don't re-accept it (thanks to the old records in the
history file) and I _don't_forward_it_either_. This way, I break all
duplicate article flow to me and through me, without anyone looking at the
path header at all.

What is the problem then? Seems to me that this approach is better than
path-based filtering. Am I missing anything?  Basically, it seems to me
that there is duplication of information somewhere. Each site already has a
history database of current and (slightly) old article ID's. This database
is good enough to prevent all propagation of duplicates. Why do we need the
additional path headers? One saving is of course, the transmission cost on
the last leg of a multi-hop loop. Is that the _only_ reason to use this
path based mechanism?


And second question: is the Path header used at all for replying to an
article? I thought the Sender and the From headers were used.

(Hope this article is not inappropriate here; should I have posted to
 news.software.b instead????)
							Shuvam

-- Shuvam Misra --------------------------- shuvam@jogin.cse.iitb.ernet.in --
-- Research Engr, Mach Project ----------------------------------------------
-- Dept of Computer Science, Indian Instt of Technology, Bombay 400076 ------
--------------------- "So much mail, so little time!" -----------------------
Newsgroups: news.admin
From: x10066@raphael.corp.mot.com (Manish Shah)
Subject: size of a posting
Organization: Computer Services Customer Services and Support
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 22:58:26 GMT
Followup-To: x10066@email.mot.com 

Is there a limitation to the size of the posting i.e what is the maximum
size allowable for a posting ? Thanks in advance for your time.


Newsgroups: news.admin,misc.legal.computing
From: forda@gtephx.UUCP (Andrew Ford @ AGCS, Phoenix, Arizona)
Subject: Re: NetNews Contract? NOT!
Organization: gte
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 23:04:47 GMT

In article <23613@alice.att.com>, jj@alice.att.com (jj, curmudgeon and clueless old white boy) writes:
> In article <1992Sep1.204533.13221@gtephx.UUCP> forda@gtephx.UUCP (Andrew Ford @ AGCS, Phoenix, Arizona) writes:
> >In article <1992Aug29.060506.12868@anomaly.sbs.risc.net>, kd1hz@anomaly.sbs.risc.net (Michael P. Deignan) writes:
> >Then please explain how a person could ever sue for breech of contract?
> There is no contract, that's the point.  What one sues for would have
> nothing whatsoever to do with breach of contract.  It would quite rightfully
> be for violation of copyright and copyright license.


Oh, of course, I get it!  The whole world provides jj everything he wants
without ever expecting anything in return!  JJ must have had a bad childhood
to be expecting that the world owes him so much!

-- 
"25 States allow anyone to buy a gun, strap it on, and walk down the street with
no permit of any kind: some say it's crazy.  However, 4 out of 5 US murders are 
committed in the other half of the country: so who is crazy?"   -  Andrew Ford
gtephx!forda@enuucp.eas.asu.edu  OR  !uunet!samsung!romed!enuucp!gtephx!forda