Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!decvax!ittatc!bunker!ricker
From: ricker@bunker.UUCP (ricker)
Newsgroups: net.news,net.politics,net.legal
Subject: Re: Towards making hosts and their admin free from a criminal offence
Message-ID: <1208@bunker.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 18-Jun-86 13:02:49 EDT
Article-I.D.: bunker.1208
Posted: Wed Jun 18 13:02:49 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 21-Jun-86 07:37:27 EDT
References: <611@bu-cs.UUCP> <164@comp.lancs.ac.uk>
Reply-To: ricker@bunker.UUCP (ricker)
Distribution: net
Organization: Bunker Ramo/Olivetti, Trumbull CT
Lines: 30
Xref: watmath net.news:5015 net.politics:16871 net.legal:3626

In article <482@ccird1.UUCP> rb@ccird1.UUCP (Rex Ballard) writes:
>This is only true on a "mod" newsgroup where mail is sent to the
>moderator.  In a "net" newsgroup, publication is accomplished as
>soon as pnews puts the article in a directory which is accessable
>to more than one user (/usr/spool/news...).
>
I insist that the person typing the article is only submitting it to
be published. Just because the organization which disseminates it
relies on automatic equipment does not absolve the organization of the
responsibility to police its traffic. Of course it is almost impossible to
police this much traffic. That is why censorship sucks.

+---------------+          +----------------+      +---------------+
| Author        |--------->|  Publisher     |----->| Subscriber    |
+---------------+          |                |      +---------------+
                           |                |
                           |                |      +---------------+
                           |                |----->| Subscriber    |
                           |                |      +---------------+
                           +----------------+

If USENET only passed on all traffic as bitstreams then it might have the
same standing as a company operating a voice switch. But USENET organizes
the data into semantically logical sets including moderators (editors) which
to me is a clear analogy to hard-copy publishing.

I am not, however, saying that USENET should be held liable for
distributing . . . hmmm . . . what phrase? . . .illegal ideas? :>

If eliminate moral censorship, we lessen these nit-picky arguments also.