From: stanley@skyking.OCE.ORST.EDU (John Stanley)
Newsgroups: alt.culture.usenet,news.admin,comp.org.eff.talk,misc.legal.computing,misc.int-pr
Subject: Re: NetNews/CD - USENET News Available
Date: 29 Jul 92 17:52:38 GMT
Organization: Oregon State University, College of Oceanography

In article <T9HFoB6w164w@lorc.UUCP> lowen@lorc.UUCP (Lamar Owen) writes:
>forda@gtephx.UUCP (Andrew Ford @ AGCS, Phoenix, Arizona) writes:
>
>> Unfortunately, USENET does not provide for partial distribution:
>> you request total distribution (by posting) or you don't post.
>
>Aha!  Time to kill two birds with one stone...
>
>Usenet, as per RFC 1036, does indeed allow for distributing to certain hosts.

No, sorry, RFC 1036 says nothing of the sort.

>So, in theory at least, if you specifically didn't want CD distribution, you
>might put a distribution: !CD in you message. It would then be up to the
>CD admin to properly configure the software to reject articles with the
>distribution: !CD header in them.

There is no mechanism specified in RFC 1036 for "not" distribution.
There is no "CD" distribution to be complemented.

>Note also that if a poster puts a distribution line in the header, that any
>sites, whether due to broken software or bad configurations, is violating the
>explicit copying restriction just placed upon the article by the distributions
>mechanism.

This might be true, were Distributions under the control of the
poster.  However, they are not, just as the decisions about which
newsgroups to carry are not. A site accepting all Distributions is
neither broken nor misconfigured. An Oregon site deliberately accepting
'ny' Distribution is neither broken nor misconfigured.

>In this case, where the poster explicitly states that the distribution is to
>be confined to a specific area (local, slo, usa, etc), the liability for
>a copyright infringement rests with the admin at the site who simply passes ALL
>or ignores distributions entirely.

Sorry, but Distribution: does not mean "limit to a specific area", it
means "limit to systems that ask for this Distribution". Some systems
ask for all Distributions. Some systems deliberatly ask for
Distributions from remote geographical areas because they feed other
systems that are located in that area, or have users that are interested
in that area. These systems are neither misconfigured nor broken.

>distribution: slo, @homecare.com, !@psych.fido.org
>
>This would, of course, route the article to homecare.com, prevent routing to
>psych.fido.org, and route to the whole slo area.

Unfortunately, if systems homecare.com and psych.fido.org ask for
Distribution slo, they will still get the message. The elements of
Distribution are 'or', not 'and'.

>WHY!!!????!!! you may ask, and with reason.  Simply this: if a poster did not
>want a certain machine (such as lorc.UUCP; MINE!) to see an article, then they
>would have the capability.  

They already have that capability. They can either not post or they can
set up a mailing list, or they can create their own hierarchy and
use contracts (which is how Clarinet keeps sites from receiving 
their material).

>Now, in order to make it work, admins are going to have to fix their sys
>files... (ARGGGHHHHH!!!!!) 

And the RFC's would have to be rewritten to make current software
non-compliant.
Newsgroups: alt.culture.usenet,comp.org.eff.talk,misc.legal.computing,news.admin