Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!snorkelwacker!apple!oliveb!amdahl!pacbell!sorinc!magik From: magik@sorinc.PacBell.COM (Darrin A. Hyrup) Newsgroups: news.misc Subject: Re: The Rape of Usenet Keywords: The wholesale capturing of Usenet by GEnie Message-ID: <8912220249.AA09907@sorinc.PacBell.COM> Date: 22 Dec 89 03:49:45 GMT References: <946@crash.cts.com> Reply-To: magik@sorinc.PacBell.COM (Darrin A. Hyrup) Followup-To: news.misc Organization: Yes, I'd like that. Lines: 166 Flames-To: /dev/null In article <946@crash.cts.com> canada@crash.cts.com (Diane Barlow Close) writes: >[... Dave Small's message goes here ...] > >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. I think he meant that he could not put general messages from his roundtable on GEnie into the Usenet network. Technically he could put replies from the messages entered into that roundtable into usenet, but not the other, non-usenet-oriented messages. >I also object most strenously to Dave limiting MY access to information by >scaring away Usenet posters who don't want the kind of publicity GEnie >offers. Usenet is supported FREELY by a conglomeration of machines (each >company covering a bit of the expenses) and I object very, very much to >GEnie profiting from other sites' generousity. Dave Small does NOT work for GEnie. Dave is an information provider to GEnie by offering his services for support through his roundtable there. They may not even be aware of this, and if they are, chances are they don't expect to make much (if anything) off of this in particular. The storage costs alone probably balance out the readership profits there. >-> It seems to me like a benefit for everyone involved, especially >-> if/when 2-waymail gets going. > >A benefit for *everyone*? It is only a benefit for *everyone on GEnie*. >Usenet people don't benefit *at all* from this one-way ``exchange'' of >information. Again you misunderstand. He was talking only about that one roundtable, not all of GEnie. And as for mail exchange, that will be available sometime in the not too distant future. The mail exchange would of course be both ways (if technically possible). >-> [...] other areas on GEnie are >-> expressing great interest in having a USENET uplink. Basically, folks, >-> USENET is perceived as the place where the people who know what they're >-> doing post notes. > >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! Eventually there may be a "Usenet roundtable" on GEnie. At least I imagine this would be the case. And if so, that would basically be identical to a unix site running news software and with a news feed. Posted messages would be introduced into usenet, and replies would become available at that area. It would be much more like a real usenet site than Dave's hack. >-> Why do it? Because a long time ago, on the CERL site on PLATO, a >-> person named Sherwin Gooch, ex-PLATO, ex-Atari, and now with Apple, >-> introduced me to the hacker ethic and freedom of information exchange as >-> its primary goal. (No, not illegal exchange, you know what I mean). [...] > >I don't call a one-way exchange ``freedom of information''. I also don't >call *free information* being uploaded to a *pay service* ``freedom''. >The hacker ethic is AGAINST the *sale* of information (as GEnie represents). >If you want a TRUE example of the hacker ethic, then read a bit about >Richard Stallman and the Free Software Foundation. *They* represent the >hacker ethic! Whoa hold on. Most available public-access usenet access sites ARE PAY SERVICES! Even those that are not public-access fall into the catagory. For example, look at any University, it charges tuition to its students, they "pay" to use the university computer and so pay to access usenet. In addition, many sites and BBS's with usenet gateways also charge users to access usenet or net mail. Don't tell me that UUNET (and any of the other sites that charge users for usenet/mail feeds) isn't a *pay service*! If this does catch on, it will eventually be 2-way, but since this is obviously a hack operation, it is probably not coming about any time soon. The restrictions in its current form are too limiting and the GEnie lawyers would undoubtedly have much good to say about it. But if it was to have its own area on GEnie, dedicated solely to usenet, it would most definately be both ways (or so I would think). It is free exchange of information, and GEnie is not the bad guy. It could be any other business out there which charges its users to access the net, or any pay-BBS for that matter (which GEnie could be considered to be), with a gateway to Usenet. The fact that this is one-way (for now) is less an injustice to us, than it is to the GEnie subscribers who may want to participate in the discussions on a 2-way basis! >-> If anyone feels this is wrong, I'll be more than happy to listen and >-> if convinced, drop the link. [...] > >Write Dave Small and voice your objections TODAY, before it's too late and >Usenet becomes GEnie (and you have to pay through the nose for what was >formerly free)! Read above. Usenet is no more free than is GEnie. The fact that many lucky people (myself included) have free access to it (besides obvious system costs, etc) does not mean it is free. Just that we aren't personally stuck paying fees to access the net. I know many people who do pay for it, and there is no reason why you should think any different. >-> Well, enough said. I hope this leads to good things -- GEnie users >-> getting good information on time, for instance. > >It's obvious from this sentence who is benefiting from this ``exchange'' of >information -- GEnie and no one else. He didn't say GEnie, he said "GEnie users"! Those people who are paying to use the GEnie "BBS" and want a usenet gateway. It will eventually be there, and I am sure that CIS and Prodigy and the others will follow suite, as the information age is upon us, and the interconnecting of networks in inevitible. >The more Usenet becomes publicized, the greater the danger of someone in >political power becoming ``concerned''. Perhaps concerned enough to pass >legislation like that currenly up for review in New York: a sysop must >validate each and every *message* that is posted to his BBS and must also >guarantee privacy of the message and guarantee that the message NOT appear >on any other service. Thats completely outrageous (both the legislation and the statement). Usenet is already very well known, and it shouldn't matter what GEnie or any other network says (and especially one who is not even a GEnie employee!) or does. Usenet will get bigger, and more publicized, and will attract more notice regardless, as that is the way of things. There is no reason to point fingers! >Is there anything (legal?) that we can do to stop this link? In general, >are there any ``net rules'' for this type of thing? Is GEnie in any danger >by uploading Usenet articles wholesale? Not really, but I think I will address this in the next reply. As for net rules, there is no rule that says anything about usenet information providers (sites) having to allow free access to everyone, nor does it say that all information must be two-ways. Look at usenet email servers! Information posted to a group is fed to various people through various gateways and email agents around the world. And this is usually one-way-only. Yet, you don't see everyone putting up a big fuss about that! And the same rules apply there as do here! There are also plenty of BBS sites out there that allow one-way usenet messages (they get usenet, but wont post it to the net). Are they also in the wrong? Some of those BBS's charge their users for access as well! Does that make them as guilty and money-hungry as GEnie is supposed to be? All in all I think you are over-reacting. >Diane Barlow Close Thats my opinion anyway, I hope it doesn't offend anyone. (No flames please). Darrin -- Darrin A. Hyrup // AMIGA Enthusiast rencon!esfenn!dah magik@sorinc.PacBell.COM \X/ & Software Developer pacbell!sorinc!magik ========================================================================== "Speak little and well, if you wish to be considered as possessing merit."