Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!aplcen!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!uwm.edu!srcsip!nic.MR.NET!ns!logajan
From: logajan@ns.network.com (John Logajan)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: Re: USENET -> GEnie uplink now working
Keywords: usenet,genie,gadgets,uplink,messages
Message-ID: <1989Dec21.221719.13364@ns.network.com>
Date: 21 Dec 89 22:17:19 GMT
References: <15097@well.UUCP> <935@crash.cts.com> <34975@grapevine.uucp> <457@watserv1.waterloo.edu>
Sender: news@ns.network.com
Organization: Network Systems Corporation, Mpls., MN
Lines: 22

bmaraldo@watserv1.waterloo.edu (Commander Brett Maraldo) writes:
>If two-way communication
>is not installed or the USENET->GEnie uplink isn't removed I'd be willing
>to cast an official vote (what ever that means :-) against the uplink.

There is no legal restriction to who may connect to USENET, therefore there
is no binding vote that can restrict who may so connect.  Further, since
there is no legal restriction to who may connect to USENET, there can be
no legally recognized distinction between sites.  Thus site restriction
messages in notices of copyright are legally meaningless.  Yet further,
there is no general information flow restriction that can be legally
enforced for any site or group of sites.

But beyond those mere matters of legality and ethics (which refute the
information stoppee's at every turn).  Ask yourself this simple question.
How long do you think GEnie users will sit still with not being able to
post to the messages they can read from USENET?


-- 
- John M. Logajan @ Network Systems;  7600 Boone Ave; Brooklyn Park, MN 55428 -
- logajan@ns.network.com, john@logajan.mn.org, Phn 612-424-4888, Fax 424-2853 -