Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!aplcen!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!nic.MR.NET!ns!logajan
From: logajan@ns.network.com (John Logajan)
Newsgroups: news.misc
Subject: Re: The Rape of Usenet
Keywords: The wholesale capturing of Usenet by GEnie
Message-ID: <1989Dec21.000041.6034@ns.network.com>
Date: 21 Dec 89 00:00:41 GMT
References: <946@crash.cts.com>
Sender: news@ns
Organization: Network Systems Corporation, Mpls., MN
Lines: 47

In article <946@crash.cts.com> canada@crash.cts.com (Diane Barlow Close) writes:
>I object to this ONE WAY transfer of information.  Dave talks about the 
>*exchange* of information.  This is not an *exchange*, it is a one-way 
>transfer of Usenet information.  I object to the rape and plunder 
>(*for profit*) of Usenet!  A summary of Usenet, or perhaps ``this is the 
>latest from Usenet'' (1 or 2 articles follow), is acceptable. This wholesale 
>plunder of Usenet is not.

Your sense of moral outrage in this case seems to be unrelated to a
consistent view of reality.  When you post something on usenet, it is in
the public domain.  You cannot thereafter attempt to pick and choose
for whose eyes only it is destined.  Further, since you recieve no
remuneration in any case, I can scarcely see how you can claim that harm
is being done to you or to anyone else.

All I see is that a few more people get to read your gems of wisdom.  Since
there is no moral requirement for anyone else on usenet to "post" some
minimal amount of information, your demand for "two way" transfer is
patently arbitrary.

>I object very, very much to GEnie profiting from other sites' generousity.

Unless you can demonstrate some smidgen of harm (and a harm that specifically
is unique to GEnie access) there is no moral significance to your outrage.

I suspect your outrage is merely symbolic.  After all, the telephone line
companies, modem companies, computer manufacturers and software firms all
make money AT THE COST OF USENET SITES!!!  Yet I seriously doubt whether
you would find it in your moral code of ethics to condem them.  If so, then
your condemnation of ANYONE (even beyond the GEnie case) is contradictory
and arbitrary on its face.
 
>Does this mean that soon *all* Usenet groups are going to be appearing on
>GEnie?  I hope we can stop this before it gets out of hand!

In contrast to the lack of harm to you or anyone caused by GEnie access,
your suggestion to prohibit GEnie access DOES cause harm to potential
GEnie usenet readers.  You, as we say, are the aggressor in this case!

>Is there anything (legal?) that we can do to stop this link?

There may be something legal -- but it could never be moral --
since you are the aggressor and the GEnie user is the victim!

-- 
- 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 -