Activism Change

Clinton/Gore Misusing Federal Computer Network Resources

Question:

[immature posting deleted] When I traceroute to mail.Clinton-Gore.org, my bits are going over PSInet, through the CIX, through UUNET.  I’m in the US. Tell me how this violates the NSFnet Acceptable Use Policy.

It doesn’t… for you. That doesn’t include many other sites, such as .EDU and .GOV sites which receive their traffic over such circuits. I’m sure a Senator like Jesse Helms would be happy to hear that a political campaign is thumping votes over a federally-funded computer network. MD — —  Michael P. Deignan                      / Sex is hereditary. If your —    UUCP: …!uunet!rayssd!anomaly!mpd  /   are you won’t either… — Telebit: +1 401 455 0347              /

Response:

No, but here in the US, passing their traffic over NSFnet is a violation of the Acceptable Use agreement. Political campaigning is not an acceptable use.

So don’t pass their traffic over NSFnet.  Usenet != Internet != NSFnet. Bob — Bob Snyder, Computing Services, GE Aerospace, Advanced Technology Labs

Response:

Spare me.  They have just as much right to blather on the net as we do. Oh, so my company has the right to blather commercial information across the net too?

There’s a big difference between posting messages espousing a political ideology and posting messages selling a commercial product. You win a free clue for confusing the two. And just who shall we elect to decide which printing presses are to be closed down for `political’ activities? "Free Speech" does not mean government-sponsored printing presses.

Which government? —  …uunet!wa3wbu!frackit!dave -or-                       |  Dave Ratcliffe  |

Response:

| |Are you saying that a political organisation signing up for a commercial |usenet/mail feed is breaking the law? | |No, but here in the US, passing their traffic over NSFnet is a violation |of the Acceptable Use agreement. Political campaigning is not an |acceptable use. What if they passed the stuff on to me in .de and I posted it? The whole point of the net is that arbitrary national restrictions on free speach and debated should be broken down. I think that not only have Clinton and Gore got a right to be on the net, they also have a duty to do so. So do Bush and Quayle. They are elected politicians and they should be accountable to their electorate. I don’t think that they should be holding polls on the net or anything of that sort. However I think it perfectly reasonable for them to set up anon ftp, gopher, WAIS or WWW servers. — Phill Hallam-Baker

Response:

[Source: anonymous ftp to nis.nsf.net in directory cise.] THE NSFNET BACKBONE SERVICES ACCEPTABLE USE POLICY GENERAL PRINCIPLE: (1) NSFNET Backbone services are provided to support open research and     education in and among US research and instructional institutions,     plus research arms of for-profit firms when engaged in open     scholarly communication and research.  Use for other purposes is     not acceptable. SPECIFICALLY ACCEPTABLE USES: (2) Communication with foreign researchers and educators in connection     with research or instruction, as long as any network that the     foreign user employs for such communication provides reciprocal     access to US researchers and educators. (3) Communication and exchange for professional development, to     maintain currency, or to debate issues in a field or subfield of     knowledge. (4) Use for disciplinary-society, university-association,     government-advisory, or standards activities related to the user’s     research and instructional activities. (5) Use in applying for or administering grants or contracts for     research or instruction, but not for other fundraising or public     relations activities. (6) Any other administrative communications or activities in direct     support of research and instruction. (7) Announcements of new products or services for use in research or     instruction, but not advertising of any kind. (8) Any traffic originating from a network of another member agency of     the Federal Networking Council if the traffic meets the acceptable     use policy of that agency. (9) Communication incidental to otherwise acceptable use, except for     illegal or specifically unacceptable use. UNACCEPTABLE USES: (10) Use for for-profit activities (consulting for pay, sales or     administration of campus stores, sale of tickets to sports events,     and so on) or use by for-profit institutions unless covered by the     General Principle or as a specifically acceptable use. (11) Extensive use for private or personal business. This statement applies to use of the the NSFNET Backbone only.  NSF expects that connecting networks will formulate their own use policies.  The NSF Division of Networking and Communications Research and Infrastructure will resolve any questions about this Policy or its interpretation. —

Response:

Interesting concept. Perhaps we should just allow every political organization in the country on the Internet, "for the good of the people" naturally. Including, naturally, groups like the NRA, Operation Rescue, and a whole slew of other groups. Hell, even Earth First could get on the ‘net so they can plot tree-spiking. I’ll note that the Internet reaches a lot more than the "country", but I’ll pass on driving home the point that this is an international network because I see that someone else has beaten me to it. There is nothing to prevent the NRA, Operation Rescue, and "a whole slew of other groups" from getting on the Internet, Usenet or any other network providing that they adhere to the rules of whichever network(s) they choose

Organizations don’t have to adhere to the rules.  In legal terms it’s known as the Barzilai Precedent. to join, and providing that they can pay the bill.  For example, you might find a scan of the Usenet "maps" quite interesting, as it will reveal that numerous groups with sociopolitical agendas are already out there. —Rsk

– They never even listen to my opinion, why would they make it policy? "The healthy gum tissue of our liberties are being eaten away by the  periodontal disease of government regulation." – D.Barry

Response:

Are you saying that a political organisation signing up for a commercial usenet/mail feed is breaking the law?

No, but here in the US, passing their traffic over NSFnet is a violation of the Acceptable Use agreement. Political campaigning is not an acceptable use. MD — —  Michael P. Deignan                      / Sex is hereditary. If your —    UUCP: …!uunet!rayssd!anomaly!mpd  /   are you won’t either… — Telebit: +1 401 455 0347              /

Response:

Oh, so my company has the right to blather commercial information across the net too?

Mine does. "Free Speech" does not mean government-sponsored printing presses.

The government doesn’t sponsor my printing press.  When you get UUCP or IP service from a commercial provider, they shouldn’t be asking you what your bits will contain.  As time marches on, most commercial sites are moving to non-subsidized networks.  As NREN is implemented, all usage restrictions should evaporate. — Eliot Lear

Response:

No, but here in the US, passing their traffic over NSFnet is a violation of the Acceptable Use agreement. Political campaigning is not an acceptable use.

ANNOUNCEMENT: Well, if you request (via FTP, mailserver, carrier-pidgin) that "political campaigning" bytes be sent to your computer, and those bytes traverse the NFSnet…  #####  ####### ####### ###### #     #    #    #     # #     # #          #    #     # #     #  #####     #    #     # ######       #    #    #     # # #     #    #    #     # #  #####     #    ####### #  #####    #     ####   #    #   #####        #    #   ####   #    #  #    #   #    #    #  #    #     #          ##   #  #    #  #    #  #    #   #    #       ######     #          # #  #  #    #  #    #  #####    #    #  ###  #    #     #          #  # #  #    #  # ## #  #   #    #    #    #  #    #     #          #   ##  #    #  ##  ##  #    #   #     ####   #    #     #          #    #   ####   #    # …or you’ll get a spanking. Otherwise, do whatever your commercial supplier permits. When I traceroute to mail.Clinton-Gore.org, my bits are going over PSInet, through the CIX, through UUNET.  I’m in the US. Tell me how this violates the NSFnet Acceptable Use Policy. Tom — "I like Bill Clinton tremendously.  I know him from the governors’ conferences. The Democrats nominated their best person, a very able fellow.  The country is well served by that choice." -Bush’s re-election chair in NJ (Thomas Kean)

Response:

Interesting concept. Perhaps we should just allow every political organization in the country on the Internet, "for the good of the people" naturally. Including, naturally, groups like the NRA, Operation Rescue, and a whole slew of other groups. Hell, even Earth First could get on the ‘net so they can plot tree-spiking.

1. What makes you think they aren’t on the net already? 2. What do you mean "THE country"? mathew — Bush/Quayle in ‘92! God Bless America! God Bless Family Values!

Response:

Interesting concept. Perhaps we should just allow every political organization in the country on the Internet, "for the good of the people" naturally. Including, naturally, groups like the NRA, Operation Rescue, and a whole slew of other groups. Hell, even Earth First could get on the ‘net so they can plot tree-spiking.

I’ll note that the Internet reaches a lot more than the "country", but I’ll pass on driving home the point that this is an international network because I see that someone else has beaten me to it. There is nothing to prevent the NRA, Operation Rescue, and "a whole slew of other groups" from getting on the Internet, Usenet or any other network providing that they adhere to the rules of whichever network(s) they choose to join, and providing that they can pay the bill.  For example, you might find a scan of the Usenet "maps" quite interesting, as it will reveal that numerous groups with sociopolitical agendas are already out there. —Rsk

Response:

Spare me.  They have just as much right to blather on the net as we do.

Oh, so my company has the right to blather commercial information across the net too? And just who shall we elect to decide which printing presses are to be closed down for `political’ activities?

"Free Speech" does not mean government-sponsored printing presses. MD — —  Michael P. Deignan                      / Sex is hereditary. If your —    UUCP: …!uunet!rayssd!anomaly!mpd  /   are you won’t either… — Telebit: +1 401 455 0347              /

Response:

 MPD Oh, so my company has the right to blather commercial information  MPD across the net too? Sure.  Set up a mail server, and let those who want the info mail to it. Or set up an anonymous ftp site, even, like, say, ftp.telebit.com, or ftp.apple.com, you get the idea.  MPD "Free Speech" does not mean government-sponsored printing presses. Looks to me like they’re paying their UUNET bill, just like any other customer.  "Government-sponsored"?  Only if the people sending mail to it are in the R&E ghetto, and that’s their lookout, not yours. — Christopher Davis   | ]CALL -151       System Administrator| *3D0G             EFF +1 617 864 0665 | ]CALL 768        

Response:

In a post here Michael Denignan asks why we don’t just let all political organizations on the Internet. I know of nothing in the NSF acceptable use policy which would prevent this, and if there is such a clause, it should be removed. May I infer from the sarcasm in Michael’s tone that he would in fact be against this? Do tell us why the last uncensored mass medium in existence should be closed to political activity, if in fact you believe this. -Steve

Response:

Once we kick the political groups off the NSF backbone, maybe we ought to address their abuse of the Federally funded Interstate Highway system. Not to mention political activists at the state level, whose use of the state-regulated telephone system for political communication is also a clear conflict of interest. -Steve

Response:

Spare me.  They have just as much right to blather on the net as we do. Oh, so my company has the right to blather commercial information across the net too?

Yup.  Just stick it in the right place.  (biz.*) And just who shall we elect to decide which printing presses are to be closed down for `political’ activities? "Free Speech" does not mean government-sponsored printing presses.

Government sponsored in what way?  If you want to say that people receiving funding from the government, you just killed every post for *.gov, as well as a large number of educational sites and some commerical ones, that do work for the government. Bob — Bob Snyder, Computing Services, GE Aerospace, Advanced Technology Labs

Response:

Commercial blathering is perfectly acceptable in the *.biz groups.  that’s what they’re there for.

Response:

: : Bill Clinton and Al Gore are committed to bringing all Americans : into the American political process — for the good of our country.   : :Ah, so they believe the ends justifies the means? They’ll do whatever :it takes, laws and existing regulations be damned. Are you saying that a political organisation signing up for a commercial usenet/mail feed is breaking the law? : We are happy to announce a new step forward in 21st century : democracy: We now have a mail server that will allow you, the : internet citizen, to receive on-line campaign documents and send : your comments and ideas back to us. : :Interesting concept. Perhaps we should just allow every political rganization in the country on the Internet, "for the good of the :people" naturally. Including, naturally, groups like the NRA, Operation :Rescue, and a whole slew of other groups. Hell, even Earth First could :get on the ‘net so they can plot tree-spiking. That sounds like a good idea.  It’s called democracy.  Hell, we’ve already got b-cpu – some of the groups you mentioned seem almost rational in comparison. G —

Response:

Bill Clinton and Al Gore are committed to bringing all Americans into the American political process — for the good of our country.  

Ah, so they believe the ends justifies the means? They’ll do whatever it takes, laws and existing regulations be damned. We are happy to announce a new step forward in 21st century democracy: We now have a mail server that will allow you, the internet citizen, to receive on-line campaign documents and send your comments and ideas back to us.

Interesting concept. Perhaps we should just allow every political organization in the country on the Internet, "for the good of the people" naturally. Including, naturally, groups like the NRA, Operation Rescue, and a whole slew of other groups. Hell, even Earth First could get on the ‘net so they can plot tree-spiking. MD — —  Michael P. Deignan                      / Sex is hereditary. If your —    UUCP: …!uunet!rayssd!anomaly!mpd  /   are you won’t either… — Telebit: +1 401 455 0347              /

Response:

Ah, so they believe the ends justifies the means? They’ll do whatever it takes, laws and existing regulations be damned.

Spare me.  They have just as much right to blather on the net as we do. Interesting concept. Perhaps we should just allow every political organization in the country on the Internet, "for the good of the people" naturally.

And just who shall we elect to decide which printing presses are to be closed down for `political’ activities? — Eliot Lear

Response:

Interesting concept. Perhaps we should just allow every political organization in the country on the Internet, "for the good of the people" naturally. Including, naturally, groups like the NRA, Operation Rescue, and a whole slew of other groups. Hell, even Earth First could get on the ‘net so they can plot tree-spiking.

Excuse me? What they are doing (according the excerpts in the article you followed up to and crossposted to news.admin, where I read it) is *no* different from what thousands of companies which have email addresses on ‘the net’ do: they are allowing people to get information, and are allowing people to send them questions and comments. And there is no prohibition, as far as I know, against using the NSFnet for political gain, just commercial uses (although that’s debatable, since it’s supposed to be to aid research, so one could make a case…). Any of the groups you mention could get on ‘the net’; it’s not that difficult, and only expensive if they want to be on the Internet, as opposed to the larger ‘the net’ as a whole. — Sean Eric Fagan  | "You can’t get lost in one room, no matter how Any opinions expressed are my own, and generally unpopular with others.

Response:

Filed under: Political campaigning

Related Posts

• OT: More Evidence of Liberal Media Bias
• Travel Warning Bali/Indonesia
• Find out what pagans thought of slavery!
• Howard Stern Tells Listeners to Vote Against Bush
• JFK Jr. accident and news media
• I want sleep at the night.... but , how????
• Looking at America
• Campaign finance reform? McConnell says forget it
• Indonesia safety bulletin 2 June