Rosaleen Dickson will be unavailable to attend the August 15 meeting. Her comments on the proposed Acceptable Use Policy are included below (RPT): From: ac174@freenet.carleton.ca (Rosaleen Dickson) To: board Subject: NCF AUP Reply-To: ac174 Having resolved to keep out of the Acceptable Use discussion, my conscience has been nagging me until I couldn't stay quiet any longer. Sorry! Most of my opinions are not shared by the rest of the board, I know that, but as long as I remain a member it would be wrong of me not to speak out. (That's one of my opinions.) So, here goes! Removing the inappropriate items, as noted below if anyone cares to read through it all, our Acceptable Use Policy and Members' Agreement should contain the following: National Capital FreeNet Acceptable Use Policy Acceptable on FreeNet are: Instruction, research, development and the transfer of technology, open discussions and private mail by any and all users, and community outreach by non-profit organizations. Unacceptable on FreeNet are: Exploiting system weaknesses, breaking into other pople's accounts, forging messages, chain letters, spams, the placing of unlawful information on the system, the use of obscene, abusive language, or violation of the Members' Agreement. National Capital FreeNet Members' Agreement: "In consideration for the use of the National Capital FreeNet Computer System and the efforts of National Capital FreeNet Inc. and its Board of Directors to develop and maintain the System, I understand and agree to the following: 1. Privilege of Use. That the use of the National Capital FreeNet Computer System is a privilege which may be revoked by its Board of Directors at any time for abusive conduct, fraudulent use or engaging in any of the activities listed as unacceptable in the National Capital FreeNet Acceptable Use Policy. 2. Performance. That the National Capital FreeNet and its Board does not warrant that the functions of this system will meet any specific requirements I may have; nor that it will be error free or uninterrupted; nor shall it be liable for any indirect, incidental or consequential damages (including lost data, information or profits) sustained or incurred in connection with the use of, operation of, or inability to use the system. 3. Adherence to NCF Rules and Regulations. To abide by such rules and regulations of system usage as may be set down from time to time by the Board of the National Capital FreeNet. 4. Release of NCF from Liability. In consideration for the privilege of using the National Capital FreeNet and in consideration for having access to the information contained on it, I hereby release the National Capital FreeNet, its Board of Directors and operators, and any institutions with which they are affiliated, for any and all claims of any nature arising from my use, or inability to use, the National Capital FreeNet." 5. Indemnification of NCF and NCF Board. To indemnify the NCF and its Board for any loss suffered to them by reason of my improper use of the System. 6. Access to Member's Account. That I will use my real name and not allow another person to use my Member ID and Password; nor will I attempt to obtain or use more than one Member ID, except as authorized in special circumstances by the National Capital FreeNet. That's it. Finis. Elnd of Members' Agreement. Below is my explanation: The Members' Agreement was written in a hurry a few years ago, at the outset of NCF, and has served us well. It's a credit to the founders. Now we have an opportunity to update it; probably the only chance we'll ever have to improve it. I'm sure whatever we decide in 1995 - or '96 will have to do for quite a while, if not forever. This quesion will not likely be revisited for decades, maybe never. We should first remove what is unnecessary -- impossible contingencies, vague redundencies and gratuitous opinions -- from the Agreement and AU Policy, leaving only the basics. With the proposed wording in "quotes," here is what we have to work with: "These guidelines are not intended to be exhaustive and in no way suggest that the National Capital FreeNet is actively responsible for monitoring daily behavior and content on the system." * OK, that's what it is not. It's not necessary to state what it is not. "The final authority for determining whether or not a use is acceptable is the NCF Board." * It's not necessary to state that. Also it implies responsibility. "Members are responsible for raising any questionable use to the NCF Board." * So that's what members are responsible for. With responsibility goes culpability, right? And they must, within this responsibility, determine what is questionable. I'd like to omit this item. "Until a specified use is determined to be acceptable, it should be considered unacceptable. " * So everything I do on Freenet is wrong unless someone tells me it is right and the next section is where I find out what is right. "2. Uses related to instruction, research, development, technology transfer and community outreach at not-for-profit organizations. "3. Uses by for-profit organizations in support of research, development and technology transfer. " * Instruction, research, development and the transfer of technology are acceptable uses of FreeNet, as well as community outreach by non-profit organizations. "4. Uses related to the administrative and other support of activities consistent with the purposes of the NCF." * Paragraph 4 is unnecessary. It's self evident. Next we have what the authors of Draft III find to be not acceptable, starting with several vague qualitative concepts which can be interpreted variously: "consistent with" "in general" "unduly interfere" "seriously disrupts" "Uses consistent with one of the following descriptions are, in general, not acceptable: "1. Uses that unduly interfere with the work of other members of the NCF, or that seriously disrupts the NCF, or that results in the loss of a member's work, this includes exploiting system weaknesses, breaking into other accounts and forging messages." * The last three items, on No. 1 above, are probably against the law anyway, but might also have a place in the list of FreeNet tabus. "2. Uses related to commercial activities such as the unsolicited distribution of advertising material. Exceptions being areas on NCF clearly designated for such a purpose. * If this is serious, we will have to clear out a large percentage of the signatures on FreeNet and monitor every nook and cranny of the system. Whoever wrote the above item suffers from the same insecurities that prompted those earlier vague ambiguous phrases. * Uses related to commercial activities covers a lot of territory. If we can't be clear on this topic, I think we should just leave it alone. Everyone who has a profession or something to sell seems to discuss it on FreeNet. How are we going to filter this out of the discussions, the SIGs, the community associations and the email? We can't. So leave it alone. "3. Uses that are considered by the NCF Board to be malicious, disruptive, annoying or unethical, including abusive or threatening language in both private and public messages.' * The Board is 15 people. Are we going to agree on what is annoying, unethical, threatening? Are we going to see what is in private messages? Are we even going to see what is in the public messages? Should we divvy up the entire contents of all the discussion groups, read them all, then bring what we find to be malicious etc... to the board and take a vote? Where are the teeth? No. 3 is impossible. "4. Uses that violate federal, provincial or municipal laws. " * Canada, the provinces and municipalities can take care of these. "5. Uses related to "chain letters" or broadcasting to lists of individuals in such a manner that may cause congestion of the NCF (also known as "spams" or "spamming"). * If I write you email explaining what chain letters and spams are, that is a use "related to "chain letters and spamming. Let's just state that chain letters and spams are not acceptable on NCF. Now come to the proposed revised Membership Agreement. "In consideration for the use of the National Capital FreeNet Computer System (the "System"), and the efforts of National Capital FreeNet Inc. ("NCF") and its Board of Directors (the "Board") to develop and maintain the System, I understand and agree to the following: "1. Privilege of Use. That the use of the System is a privilege which may be revoked by the Board of Directors of the System at any time for abusive conduct or fraudulent use. Such conduct would include, but not be limited to, the placing of unlawful information on the system, the use of obscene, abusive or otherwise objectionable language in either public or private messages, or violation of this Agreement. The Board of the National Capital FreeNet will be the sole arbiter of what constitutes obscene, abusive, or objectionable language." * The otherwise objectionable languagesill vary (what's objectionable to me might not be to you, and vice versa - should we take a vote?) and including private messages suggests some sort of snooping. I think we could leave those parts out. And if the Board is going to be the sole arbiter, how much time at each meeting are we going to spend going over the contents of FreeNet to weed out the unlawful information etc...? "2. Objectionable Material. That the National Capital FreeNet reserves the right to review any material stored in files or programs to which other Members have access and will edit or remove any material which the Board, in its sole discretion, believes may be unlawful, obscene, abusive, or otherwise objectionable. * If we are really going to review material stored in files and will edit or remove what we (we 15 people that is) deem to be objectionable, when will this be done? Has it been done? Not since I've been on the board. Who invades the files and copies them out for the board to peruse? If this is impractical, it should be omitted. "3. Private, Non-Commercial Use. That all information services and features contained on the National Capital FreeNet are intended for the private use of its patrons, and any commercial or unauthorized use or publication of those materials, in any form, is expressly forbidden." * Again - this is not realistic. There is no harm done by people telling the world they have kittens for sale, or that they do dressmaking, or have computer expertise for hire. And lots of exchanges of pieces of computer devices have been helpful to members. If someone gets a job doing taxes, or painting houses or teaching Unix through their use of FreeNet, so what? The general fear that everything commercial is somehow evil is a phenomenon of civil service, and academic communities but does not reflect the leanings of most of the population. As far as I can see there is absolutely no reason for the inclusion of No. 3. If we want to keep it, we must do a big clean up of the whole system. "4. Reference to Individuals. That all information contained on the National Capital FreeNet is placed there for general informational and entertainment purposes and is, in no way, intended to refer or be applicable to any specific person, case, or situation. " * This is an unusual opinion about what is on NCF and why it is there. It's a disclaimer. It is not part of an agreement. Is it true? No. Just read the discussion groups and see if they refer or are applicable to specific persons, cases, or situations. Of course they do, invariably. "5. Performance. That the National Capital FreeNet and its Board does NOT warrant that the functions of this system will meet any specific requirements I may have; nor that it will be error free or uninterrupted; nor shall it be liable for any indirect, incidental or consequential damages (including lost data, information or profits) sustained or incurred in connection with the use of, operation of, or inability to use the system." * No. 5 is good. "6. Adherence to NCF Rules and Regulations. To abide by such rules and regulations of system usage as may be set down from time to time by the Board of the National Capital FreeNet." * Nothing the matter with No. 6. "7. Release of NCF from Liability. In consideration for the privilege of using the National Capital FreeNet and in consideration for having access to the information contained on it, I hereby release the National Capital FreeNet, its Board of Directors and operators, and any institutions with which they are affiliated, for any and all claims of any nature arising from my use, or inability to use, the National Capital FreeNet." * No. 7 is fine. I disagree with the grammar, but I suppose it's "law talk." "8. Indemnification of NCF and NCF Board. To indemnify the NCF and its Board for any loss suffered to them by reason of my improper use of the System, and to compensate anyone harmed by my abusive use of the system." * Yikes! Do we really expect members to "compensate anyone harmed" by their abusive use of the system? What happens when the claims of harm done start to roll in. Maybe they won't, but, if we keep this clause, they could. "9. Non-Professional Service. That the information provided on the System is offered as a community service and is not a substitute for individual professional consultation. Adequate professional guidance for making important personal decisions cannot be provided through an electronic format of this type. Advice on individual problems should be obtained personally from a professional. I agree: (1) that I understand this Agreement; (2) that by using the System, I am not seeking to establish a doctor/patient, lawyer/client, or similar relationship with any of the Information Providers or other Members; and (3) that the Information Providers and NCF can rely on my promises in this paragraph (and elsewhere on this form) as an inducement to provide information on the System." * Who says that professional guidance can't be provided through an electronic format of this type? No. 9 is an opinion, and perhaps a friendly warning, but is not a part of an agreement. And as for establishing business relationships on FreeNet, who is going to monitor that and prevent it, and why? And how would this become aninducement to profice information on the System? "10. Access to Member's Account. That I will not allow another person to use my Member ID and Password; nor will I attempt to obtain or use more than one Member ID, except as authorized in special circumstances by the National Capital FreeNet." * Though unenforcable No. 10 might as well remain in the agreement. It's likely to put ideas into people's heads though, and members who plan to do these things will anyway. "11. Provision of Accurate Information. All registered Members of the National Capital FreeNet must provide accurate information on their application forms. Pseudonyms, nicknames, 'handles' or false names are not allowed -- use your real name. Failure to provide accurate information may result in denial of system access. Willful misrepresentation or deliberate attempts to conceal or forge information may result in legal action against you. * I can't see taking legal action against people who fail to give their real name. Anyway, this is a regulation, not an agreement. On the application form the member is told what to do. Misrepresentation and forgery are dealt with elsewhere. "12. Unsolicited Advertising. The National Capital FreeNet prohibits all unsolicited advertising, both direct and 'broadcast', except in the case of non-commercial advertisements posted only in the news groups reserved for such purposes." * Oh no. Not again! And what's a non-commercial advertisement? Not that it matters. This is wrong anyway you look at it. Finally, we come to Possible new items (in no particular order). "13. Reselling of Service. The NCF prohibits members from reselling access to any individuals or organizations." * How do we "prohibit" this? We can ask them not to do it but then again, why? "14. No Liability for Loss or Disclosure of Information or Data. The NCF assumes no liability for the security or loss of information or data." * Why must this be reworded and repeated? Read No. 5 above. "15. Un-solicited E-mail. The sending of unsolicited e-mail is prohibited." * All the email I get is unsolicited. This doesn't make sense to me. "16. Use of NCF to Support Unlawful Activities. Any use of the NCF in support of unlawful activities is prohibited." * If it's against the law, the law can take care of it. Why should we? "17. Copyright on Information. In accordance with the Canadian Copyright Act, copying of any data or information from the NCF (other than that which is directed to a specific person or group of persons, i.e. e-mail, conferences), without permission of the originator, is prohibited." * Copyright law is copyright law, debatable and enforcable in a court of law. Why must we get involved? And if we try to prohibit anyone from copying anything from NCF, there are a lot of people out there to go after. Several of my essays, a poem, and an article I wrote have been copied from FreeNet and published without my permission. I was flattered of course, but this happens all the time. We can quote copyright law somewhere if we want to but it has no place in an agreement between members and the NCF. It's just an item of useful information. "18. NCF Board Authority. The NCF Board has final authority for acceptable use policies and decisions regarding acceptability. Until the acceptability of a proposed use is determined, any use that is not defined as acceptable, is unacceptable." * Here we go again! Guilty until proven innocent. This is crazy! "19. Violations of Acceptable Use. Notification of any perceived violation of this Member Agreement or the Acceptable Use Policy, is to be directed to the NCF User Complaints Co-ordinator, via e-mail addressed to the "complain" alias. Complaints will be handled as per the Acceptable use policy by the NCF User Complaints Co-ordinator. If the NCF User Complaints Co-ordinator is unable to determine if a violation of the Acceptable Use Policy has occurred, the complaint will be escalated to the NCF Executive Committee and finally to the NCF Board if necessary." * Must members direct anhy perceived violation of the agreement to the complaints co-ordinator? What is the penalty if they don't? Are all members expected to be net police? Anyway, No. 20 is not a part of an agreement, it's a description of procedure and a rule. It belongs in rules and regulations, somewhere on the menu, not in an agreement. "20. Acceptable Use Policy. Where the acceptability of a proposed use of the NCF is not clearly defined in this Membership Agreement, the NCF Acceptable Use Policy shall be used by the NCF board to provide guidelines in determining the acceptability of a proposed use." * Say what? Does this imply that everyone has to tell the board what they are about to do before they do it? How much time each month are we going to spend going over everything everyone plans to do or say on FreeNet to decide on its acceptability? I doubt that anyone is still with me, but for those hardy souls who have read it all, I hope you can see the logic in my reasoning. A nice, brief but to the point agreement, and a clearly stated unambiguous policy of acceptable use were what I was aiming at. I hope you agree that it makes more sense than what we have been struggling with. Yours truly, Rosaleen (With apologies for the typos and gllitches. As always, I am rushed.)