[2579] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
RE: world.std.com and MichNet
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Sean Donelan)
Tue Mar 17 18:09:48 1992
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1992 17:05:55 -0600 (CST)
From: SEAN@SDG.DRA.COM (Sean Donelan)
To: Jeff.Ogden@um.cc.umich.edu, com-priv@psi.com
X-Vmsmail-To: SMTP%"Jeff.Ogden@um.cc.umich.edu",SMTP%"com-priv@psi.com"
>Finally I don't really know enough about world.std.com to know
>if they should be added or not. I just suspect that access from
>the University of Michigan would be in support of Education and
>Research and so could be allowed under the NSF AUP.
You say you don't know enough about the World to know if it access would
be acceptable. But you are the one at the not-for-profit research and
educational facility that any access to World is supposed to be in support.
How is the World supposed sign a piece of paper that access from places
like U of M would be in support of Education and Research and allowed under
the NSF AUP when the people at those places don't know?
Is it any wonder why vendors don't like the NSF AUP. They can't tell
if something would be acceptable because it depends on what purpose it
is used at the other end of the link. And that depends on users at places
like U of M. I certainly wouldn't want to bet my business, or my freedom
on the behavior of a random person on the network. A professor ftping stock
quotes for his research in economics and market behavior may be Ok. A
professor ftping stock quotes to check his investment portfolio may not be Ok.
But what is the responsibility under the NSF AUP of the vendor for selling
either (or both) of those professors stock quotes across the network?
What's the penalty for guessing wrong? The laws are pretty scary on the
subject of misuse of government funds.
I say give the money to the researchers, and if they mis-spend it, let it
be their problem to explain why they did what they did.
--
Sean Donelan, Data Research Associates, Inc, St. Louis, MO
Domain: sean@sdg.dra.com, Voice: (Work) +1 314-432-1100
