[2623] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
The Emporer's Clothes
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Barry Shein)
Mon Mar 23 17:48:48 1992
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 92 17:46:28 -0500
From: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein)
To: com-priv@psi.com
In-Reply-To: "Kent W. England"'s message of Mon, 23 Mar 92 10:47:20 EDT <9203231548.AA04019@psi.com>
>From: "Kent W. England" <kwe2@BBN.COM>
>I would agree that it is a fine defense of the need for open
>communications and personal freedom, but you must remember that the vast
>majority of individuals still access the Internet via institutional
>networks. These people will still be subject to appropriate use when
>they use their institutional networks no matter how the backbones are
>provisioned.
1. The vast majority access the internet...
Is that full connectivity? Does that include e-mail
only (e.g. MCImail? Compuserve? USENET?)
It's exactly these ambiguities that make the problem
complicated, can't just swish them away with vague
language.
2. via institutional networks.
What is an institutional network? Do you mean regional
network? Do you mean via the LAN at some University eg?
I'll assume regionals. A lot of the regionals are permitting
commercial traffic within the regional. As far as head-count*
goes I think that accounts for "the vast majority". Nearnet,
SURAnet, possibly BARRnet, CERFnet, NYSERnet, essentially
both coasts, comes to mind. I'll guess others have similar
policies where they have jurisdiction.
* Another vague term. Vast majority of end-users? Hosts? Regionals
even if they're tiny? I'm using "end-users" here.
Now, one can mince words, there's always some sort of "appropriate
use", but it seemed to me you meant that they are under a regional (or
institutional?) AUP which was approximately the same as NSF's AUP.
I think that's simply untrue for "the vast majority", or at least a
very large and significant plurality.
There's also a chicken and egg problem in your view of the matter.
If the commercial side is being kept out by AUP and that's what we're
trying to encourage for the first time it's not really useful to point
out that the current user community is not primarily commercial and
then conclude that therefore, based on past experience, this is how it
will always be.
At the very least one would have to show that the current situation
serves these end-users.
My guess is that most regionals which have an AUP which mirrors NSF's
AUP only have that because they think they have to be in synch with
NSF to be attached. It's the same confusion.
-Barry Shein
Software Tool & Die | bzs@world.std.com | uunet!world!bzs
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 617-739-0202 | Login: 617-739-WRLD
