Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!unmvax!ncar!boulder!sunybcs!rutgers!njin!princeton!phoenix!vnend From: vnend@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (D. W. James) Newsgroups: news.admin Subject: Some questions about USENET and commercial sites Message-ID: <7105@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> Date: 15 Mar 89 23:16:18 GMT Reply-To: vnend@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (D. W. James) Organization: Princeton University, NJ Lines: 72 Some questions: 1) The internet has a certain prohibition against commercial use of the network. Would traffic in rec.humor.funny, some of which was both coming from and going to a purely pay-by-the-minute-reading site (Compuserve, GEnie, etc.) constitute commercial use of the network? 2) I've seen one person claiming that Brad built rec.humor.funny practically with his bare hands. I've seen someone else saying that he was elected. Which was it? 3) With regards to the commercial systems having access to USENET in general, don't they claim some copyright to their stuff? If so, will they be claiming some kind of copyright of the USENET traffic? And, once again, how does their charging affect the internet? *************** The question of Brad recieving money for his *time* spent working on the other system is one thing. I think that his recieving money for the time *others* spend reading it is another. But I can't decide if I am for or against the idea. *Hopefully* it will mean we get more jokes, in which case the result from our point of view is just that another site has been added. The question of whether Brad is/was intending to use the compilation copyright for this purpose all along is yet another, but I really don't see how we can answer it. Brad's answer would be the same if he is clean as the driven snow or not would be the same. The question of whether the compilation copyright should belong to Brad or, say, USENIX or Stargate or UUNET (as nonprofit organizations associated with the net) is something I don't think anyone has discussed. The question of gateways between USENET and the commercial 'networks' boils down to a very simple question: *Are* they "just another site?" How does Compuserve on the net differ from, say, Apple? Both are businesses. Both are computer oriented. True, Compuserve is selling computer time/information, while Apple produces hardware (mostly.) One wants to charge people to access the net, the other pays people who have access to USENET. But there are already sites on the net that charge people to read USENET. No, not Portal or Chinet. Princeton does. Businesses and individuals can buy disk space and time (cpu and connect) on the IBM's here. If they do then they have access to USENET, and they are charged for the connect time spent reading it and the CPU usage involved. Does this make us a commercial site? In my opinion, (let me repeat that, IN MY OPINION) so long as a site is willing accept USENET newsgroups without modifying them, without claiming ownership of them and as long as its readers can participate, then it should be allowed to hook up. If it is unwilling to do this then it should not. A site can screen or censor its own people all it wants, it should not take it upon itself to screen the information on the net other than by accepting or not accepting a group. Anytime some person or site trys to claim some part of the information flow that is the USENET for its own, then it threatens the freedom of that flow, and becomes counter to the purpose of the network, the free exchange of information. (Free as in open, for the the picky boneheads out there.) Then it should be cut off. Discussion? -- Later Y'all, Vnend Ignorance is the mother of adventure. SCA event list? Mail? Send to:vnend@phoenix.princeton.edu or vnend@pucc.bitnet Anonymous posting service (NO FLAMES!) at vnend@ms.uky.edu Love is wanting to keep more than one person happy.