Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site proper.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!akgua!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!hplabs!zehntel!dual!proper!gam
From: gam@proper.UUCP (Gordon Moffett)
Newsgroups: net.followup
Subject: Re: "tim" generically
Message-ID: <1289@proper.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 28-May-84 15:41:20 EDT
Article-I.D.: proper.1289
Posted: Mon May 28 15:41:20 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 1-Jun-84 06:40:14 EDT
References: <2591@ecsvax.UUCP>
Organization: Proper UNIX, Oakland, CA
Lines: 11
Keywords: rights,justice,legality,free speech,ethics

#
I find the arguments about whether a "tim" has a right to use the
net or whether that is a priviledge granted to a "tim" irrelevant
for the most part.

Simply because an act is legal does not make it right or just.
UNC & Mr. Brooks may have been entirely within their rights and
the law to restrict Mr. Maroney, but (from what I have seen) it
was a silly game with a bunch of power-politics and high ego
stakes envolved.  To me, this transcends the `rights/priviledge'
issue.