Xref: utzoo news.admin:7746 misc.legal:12392
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!rice!uw-beaver!milton!max!wcn
From: wcn@max.u.washington.edu (W C Newell Jr)
Newsgroups: news.admin,misc.legal
Subject: Re: Usenet and legal liability
Message-ID: <10882@max.u.washington.edu>
Date: 23 Nov 89 01:27:41 GMT
References: <25683CAB.25106@ateng.com> <10771@max.u.washington.edu> <1989Nov21.181205.3875@utzoo.uucp> <51365@looking.on.ca>
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle WA
Lines: 27

In article <51365@looking.on.ca>, brad@looking.on.ca (Brad Templeton) writes:
> Nobody can or should control all that flows through USENET, but site
> admins certainly do have it within their power to net get alt.sex, or
> rec.humor, or even sci.aquaria :-).
 
Absolutely.
 
> Personally, I think they are crazy.  For once you start controlling this,
> forbidding one group and permitting another based on your opinion of the
> legality of its content, then you *are* responsible for feeding it because
> you have, and have exercised, control.
>
> I think it is far safer to take no moral stands on what is written than
> to take just one.
 
Fine, if each site had unilateral control over its resources.  We are a public
institution, however, and are accountable to the taxpayers who foot the bills,
more specifically to the state and federal agencies which represent them (in
particular the National Science Foundation).  It's their network, after all.
  
If anyone has problems with the policies of the NSF or the University of
Washington, they don't have to include us in their distribution.
 
Bill Newell
Systems Analyst, Applications Consulting Group
University of Washington
WCN@MAX.U.WASHINGTON.EDU