From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [ucb.org.csua, et al.]  Re: The Schedule of Classes
Followup-To: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,ucb.org.csua,ucb.org.ocf,ucb.english,talk.environment,comp.org.eff.talk
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 21:25:41 GMT

[A repost - Carl]

From: clw@ocf.berkeley.edu (A Ghost in the Machine)
Newsgroups: ucb.org.csua,ucb.org.ocf,ucb.english,talk.environment,comp.org.eff.talk
Subject:  Re: The Schedule of Classes
Date: 23 Jan 1993 09:08:00 GMT


Some comments on three related posts...

The original letter stated:

In article <1jnh89$phg@agate.berkeley.edu> hh@soda.berkeley.edu (Eric Hollander) writes:

>LaVerne Lazzereschi had complained to the Office of Student Conduct that I
>had "misused" University computer equipment.
>
>I talked with Mr. Paganucci in his office today at 10:00.  The discussion
>was brief.  He told me that unplugging terminals is misuse of equipment.  He
>told me that he is giving me an informal warning.  He made me state that I
>did not intend to unplug terminals or "misuse" equipment again.
>
>I stated to him that I will never again "misuse" computer equipment in order
>to acquire public information in electronic form.
>
>I believe that computers exist to provide access to information.  Using a
>computer to give me this access can never be misuse.
>
>Eric Hollander
>

I can only conclude from the original denial of this resource together with
this persecution for its aquisition that LaVerne Lazzereschi (and probably
Mr. Paganucci) is effectively computer illiterate, and has no clear idea what 
she is restricting.  Absurd as this particular case is, it seems to me that 
there is an interesting underlying theme here: these two people have the 
authority to place and enforce restrictions upon something of which they 
are fundementally ignorant.

This response the the quoted article was prompted:

In article <1jnh89$phg@agate.berkeley.edu> zyin@soda.berkeley.edu (Zheng Yin) writes:

>Such an interpretation would license you to engage in activities not as 
>"altrustic" as your transfer of Schedule of Classes data, such as access 
>and probably alternation of the academic record of any student.  The 
>University, the government, and millions of individuals handle data on 
>computers and over networks.  This by no means implies that you can insert 
>your own computer into their network and gain access to their information, 
>with impunity.

While most of this can be dismissed by rereading Eric's post and noting the
words 'public information', there remains the consideration of whether plugging
his portable into the system amounted to abuse of equipment.  What he did,
though, amounted to neither damage nor interruption of service (he was a valid
receiver of the service, so his use of it was not an interruption), I would
not regard this as abuse.

In article <JMC.93Jan21231123@SAIL.Stanford.EDU> jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy) writes:

>What I understand he did in replacing his terminal by a powerbook was
>to take information available one class at a time and use it to get
>the schedule as a whole.  It is a nice point as to whether the
>University could claim that the whole is confidential, although each
>of its parts is not.

Creative in theory, if utterly absurd in practice :)

I suppose, though, he might have violated copyright, if the information was
for reading, but not for copying.  I would be most entertained if they are
suggesting the copyright of THIS information is restricted...

-- 
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent any organization; this is just me.
 = kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,ucb.org.csua,ucb.org.ocf,ucb.english,talk.environment,comp.org.eff.talk