Wed Mar 10 1993 Volume 5 : Issue 19
Editors: Jim Thomas and Gordon Meyer (TK0JUT2@NIU.BITNET)
Archivist: Brendan Kehoe
Shadow-Archivists: Dan Carosone / Paul Southworth
Ralph Sims / Jyrki Kuoppala
Copy Eater: Etaion Shrdlu, Senior
CONTENTS, #5.19 (Mar 10 1993)
File 1–Author responds to Shopping Mall criticism
File 2–Re: Hackers in the News (CuD #5.18)
File 3–Internet Talk Radio (fwd)
File 4–Call for Stories — Reasons to Build the NII
Cu-Digest is a weekly electronic journal/newsletter. Subscriptions are
available at no cost from email@example.com. The editors may be
contacted by voice (815-753-6430), fax (815-753-6302) or U.S. mail at:
Jim Thomas, Department of Sociology, NIU, DeKalb, IL 60115.
Issues of CuD can also be found in the Usenet comp.society.cu-digest
news group; on CompuServe in DL0 and DL4 of the IBMBBS SIG, DL1 of
LAWSIG, and DL0 and DL12 of TELECOM; on GEnie in the PF*NPC RT
libraries and in the VIRUS/SECURITY library; from America Online in
the PC Telecom forum under “computing newsletters;”
On Delphi in the General Discussion database of the Internet SIG;
on the PC-EXEC BBS at (414) 789-4210;
in Europe from the ComNet in Luxembourg BBS (++352) 466893;
ANONYMOUS FTP SITES:
UNITED STATES: ftp.eff.org (126.96.36.199) in /pub/cud
red.css.itd.umich.edu (188.8.131.52) in /cud
halcyon.com( 184.108.40.206) in /pub/mirror/cud
AUSTRALIA: ftp.ee.mu.oz.au (220.127.116.11) in /pub/text/CuD.
EUROPE: nic.funet.fi in pub/doc/cud. (Finland)
ftp.warwick.ac.uk in pub/cud (United Kingdom)
Back issues also may be obtained from the mail server at
COMPUTER UNDERGROUND DIGEST is an open forum dedicated to sharing
information among computerists and to the presentation and debate of
diverse views. CuD material may be reprinted for non-profit as long
as the source is cited. Some authors do copyright their material, and
they should be contacted for reprint permission. It is assumed that
non-personal mail to the moderators may be reprinted unless otherwise
specified. Readers are encouraged to submit reasoned articles
relating to computer culture and communication. Articles are
preferred to short responses. Please avoid quoting previous posts
unless absolutely necessary.
DISCLAIMER: The views represented herein do not necessarily represent
the views of the moderators. Digest contributors assume all
responsibility for ensuring that articles submitted do not
violate copyright protections.
Date: Wed, 10 MAR 93 13:27:55 GMT
Subject: File 1–Author responds to Shopping Mall criticism
CuD 5.07 published my article “Scenes of Passive Resistance at a
Shopping Mall” which presented a legal strategy based on accounts of
the Washington 2600 incident. I have received a good deal of feedback
since then and CuD has published two detailed responses. I felt that
it would be appropriate to respond to a few of the criticisms raised.
In CuD 5.08, firstname.lastname@example.org had a number of things to say
about lawyers — many not very positive. While I appreciate his/her
generally favorable response to the article, there were three points I
wish to respond to. The first deals with a lawyer’s duty to a client.
>Also, see Corpus Juris Secundum (CJS), Volume 7, Section 4,
>Attorney & client: “The attorney’s first duty is to the courts and
>the public, NOT TO THE CLIENT, and wherever the duties to his
>client conflict with those he owes as an officer of the court in
>the administration of justice, THE FORMER MUST YIELD TO THE
>LATTER.” (emphasis mine) I trust this needs no further
Unfortunately, this requires a great deal more explanation. First,
the statement in CJS (which is a legal encyclopedia, and not positive
law) must be offset by the law regarding a lawyer’s duty to his
client. In every U.S. jurisdiction I am aware of, a lawyer owes a
duty to zealously advocate the client’s position within the bounds of
the law. Additionally, a lawyer must maintain client confidences
under all but the most strained of circumstances. For example, if a
client confesses that he murdered someone, the attorney can counsel
the client to turn himself in, but MUST NOT reveal the confession. In
fact, if the attorney breaks this rule and testifies against the
client, the testimony will be inadmissible. If a lawyer feels that he
or she cannot continue as counsel, his or her only recourse is to
resign from the case without disclosing the reason and ask the court
to appoint a new attorney. (Before I am flooded by mail from other
lawyers, please understand that this is a gross oversimplification.
If you are curious, ask a practicing criminal attorney or a law
student taking a class in professional responsibility.)
I think that this statement from CJS, standing on its own, does not
give an accurate portrayal of a lawyer’s duty to a client. I would
also caution anyone about trying to discern the state of the law by
reading statements in isolation taken from old Supreme Court
decisions, legal encyclopedias, hornbooks, casebooks, etc. Law, like
programming, can be a tricky business. Parts that look clear at first
glance can be influenced by other bits you do not see at first. Would
you try to predict the operation of a ten million line program by
studying the source code of only one sub-module?
I want to highlight two smaller issues raised by ims. First:
>>A really smart cop might say to the guard, “I will not make the
>>search, but I won’t stop you if you search.” Stand your ground
>>at this point. Tell the real cop that you REFUSE to allow the
>>search unless the real cop orders the search to take place.
>Excellent suggestion, but be sure to take the above precautions
>regarding true identity and lawful authority before you think about
I should clarify what I wrote — NEVER consent. Always make it clear
that you OBJECT to a search, but your objection cannot rise to the
level of physical violence. If a police officer orders you to open
your bag, you will have to open it.
>>The only words you should utter after being arrested are “I want to
>>speak with a lawyer.”
>Change this to, “I demand counsel of my choice.” The 6th Amendment
>is your authority. If the court tries to force you to use a “licensed
>lawyer” or a “public defender”, it is not counsel of your choice.
The reason I suggested the phrase “I want to speak with a lawyer”
is that under the rapidly disappearing _Miranda_ rule, this is
the magic phrase which tells police officers that they are no
longer allowed to ask you any questions. As an aside, ims’ 6th
Amendment argument has been tried with mixed success. At best,
courts have been told that they MAY allow a defendant to
represent herself, but it is by no means an absolute right. (I use
“herself” since the leading case involved the trial of attempted
Presidential assassin Squeaky Frome.)
I obviously have radically different views from
email@example.com about whether having a lawyer in court is a
good idea. I tend to believe that having a lawyer is the best way of
staying out of jail or at least minimizing the time spent there. Of
course, you would expect me to say that since I am a lawyer. 🙂
In CuD 5.12, Steve Brown <70511.3424@COMPUSERVE.COM> had two broad
criticisms of the article. In his first criticism, he asks why I am
urging confrontation with security guards. To quote:
>>Third, recognize that a mall IS private property and the mall
>>operators can throw you out for little or no reason. Fourth,
>>mall cops are not government agents, and as such, their conduct
>>is (mostly) not governed by the Constitution. So what does this
>>all mean? Basically, Ghandi was right. The ticket to dealing
>>with obstreperous uniformed mall cops is polite, passive
>>resistance. The key here is POLITE. At all times, assure the
>>mall cop that you will obey all lawful instructions. Do not give
>>the uniforms any reason whatsoever to escalate the scene.
>>If you are confronted by a group of threatening looking mall
>>cops and they hassle you, ask if you are being ejected from the
>>mall. If yes, then wish the officers a nice day and head for the
>>nearest exit. If no, then wish the officers a nice day and head
>>for the nearest exit. (Do you see a pattern emerging? Remember,
>>you do not generally have a “right” to stay in a mall. Thus,
>>your best defense from ignorant mall cops is to get the hell off
>>of their turf.)
>”The mall operators can throw you out for
>little or no reason.” So if that’s the case, why would you even want
>to stay and ask a bunch of unintelligent questions. As for your
>strategy, I think Ghandi would tell you to forget about being polite.
>I think he’d tell you to “get the hell out of Dodge.” Why you would
>encourage anyone to confront “obstreperous uniformed mall cops with
>polite, passive resistance” is beyond me.
I think that I failed to clearly express myself on this point. By all
means, I would encourage someone to leave the mall if that is
possible. My understanding of the 2600 incident is that the attendees
may have been detained by force, and my encouragement of polite
passive resistance is restricted to this kind of situation only. I am
NOT suggesting a 60’s style sit-in as sponsored by civil rights
groups, and thus I am not urging anyone to “confront” guards with
passive resistance. The strategy — as I see it — is for use only
when the guards make it clear that you are being detained. In fact,
the opening parts of the strategy are designed to determine whether or
not a forceful detention is in progress.
In Mr Brown’s second and larger criticism, he begins by reminding me
that law enforcement officials have used the term “hacker” as a
dehumanizing shorthand to lump all computer users into one big
malicious group. He compares this practice with my use of the term
“uniform” to describe all security guards and police officers. In his
>My biggest concern is your attempt to dehumanize the police in a
>similar way. Whether you know it or not (maybe you don’t really
>care), you have employed the same dehumanizing method in your
>effort to portray law enforcement. The computer world should not
>alienate its “enemy” through the use of name calling.
>Your effort seems to have been to inform people of their legal
>recourses during an incident similar to the “2600 Harassment”
>incident. The strength of the legal advise given, however, was
>weakened by the strategy you chose to use. You have probably
>confused a good many people in your attempt to explain sound
>legal ideas. A GUARD is a guard. A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER
>(police, cop) is a law enforcement officer.
>A uniform unfortunately is what many ignorant people see. It is
>a way to dehumanize a person who gives you a ticket when you
>speed, prevents you from driving home after a fun night of
>partying, rushes your child to the hospital while he or she
>bleeds to death in a patrol car, and risks his life to protect
>yours during a robbery. Occasionally, he or she has to arrest an
>individual whether it be for a crime committed with a computer or
>not. Often when a police officer is killed in the line of duty,
>the news passes like a cold wind. It’s much easier to put a
>bullet through a uniform than someone with a wife or husband and
I have quoted Mr Brown rather extensively because I feel he has raised
a very valid point. My use of the term “uniform” to describe both
security guards and police officers was ill-advised and I apologize if
anyone has taken offence. People who wear uniforms often have
difficult jobs to perform, and we should always remember that
underneath they are people, too.
The second point raised by this criticism is that I equivocated guards
and police officers when in fact they have very different training and
goals. I plead guilty — I should have been more careful with the
distinction. In my defense, I will point out that part of the
strategy is to get a police officer on the scene if at all possible.
As I stated, police officers have been trained about the scope of
Constitutional protections and can often be useful in defusing
situations like this.
I will be the first to admit that police officers have a very
difficult, and often thankless, job to perform. I, for one, am always
glad to see a police officer on patrol when I am driving at night.
(These days, my wife and I feel better when we pass a Bobby on foot
patrol in London.) I am glad that Mr Brown called me on my
insensitive use of the term “uniform”, and I also hope that when
confronted by police officers (or any person) we remember to act in a
civilized fashion — even if confronted with what we perceive to be
Disclaimer: This is not presented as a legal opinion and should not be
relied upon as such. If you have questions, please contact a lawyer
in your jurisdiction.
ROBERT A. CAROLINA
Member, Illinois State Bar Association
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 93 13:00 PST
From: john%zygot.ati.com@HARVUNXW.BITNET(John Higdon)
Subject: File 2–Re: Hackers in the News (CuD #5.18)
Having been a guest on a Los Angeles radio talk show with a
representative from Thrifty Tel, I can give you the real reason that
company keeps its totally insecure five-digit access codes. The
“hacker tariff” (which the CPUC approved, bypassing normal hearings,
etc.) is a major profit center for the company. Thrifty Tel stays in
business because of the money that it extorts from its “hacker trap”,
not from its third-rate reselling operation.
The claim that adding a couple of digits to the access codes would
inconvenience customers is utter nonsense. The calls are placed using
dialers, and at 50 ms dialing rates the addition of five more digits
to the code would increase the call setup time by less than one-half
second. As a reseller, I would never consider using less than ten
digits for an access code, which happens now to be the industry norm.
But no one should be taken in by Thrifty Tel’s self-righteousness. The
company has no desire whatsoever to eliminate its “hacker problem”. On
the contrary, it is the constant supply of “new meat”–kids that have
not yet heard about the infamous Thrifty Tel–that keeps the doors
open on that despicable operation. I would even be willing to bet that
there are many open codes that are not even assigned to customers to
make it even easier for those nasty hackers to fall into the trap.
While I give no quarter to people who steal computer and telephone
services, I have even less respect for the Thrifty Tels of the world
who exploit the problem for self-enrichment.
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1993 00:26:59 EST
Subject: File 3–Internet Talk Radio (fwd)
Originally from firstname.lastname@example.org via Bernard.A.Galler@um.cc.umich.edu
Reprinted with permission from ConneXions,
ConneXions–The Interoperability Report is published monthly by:
480 San Antonio Road, Suite 100
Mountain View, CA 94040
Phone: (415) 941-3399 FAX: (415) 949-1779
Toll-free (in USA): 1-800-INTEROP
Free sample issue and list of back issues available upon request.”
Internet Talk Radio
Carl Malamud (email@example.com)
Over the past few years, two trends have come together to
present an opportunity for a new type of journalism. On the one hand,
the trade press has focused on marketing and product reviews, leaving
an ever-larger gap for a general-interest, technically-oriented
publication focused on the Internet. At the same time, the Internet
has made great progress in supporting multimedia communication,
through standards such as IP multicasting and MIME messaging.
Internet Talk Radio attempts to fuse these two trends and form
a new type of publication: a news and information service about the
Internet, distributed on the Internet. Internet Talk Radio is modeled
on National Public Radio and has a goal of providing in-depth
technical information to the Internet community. The service is made
initially possible with support from Sun Microsystems and O’Reilly &
Associates. Our goal is to provide a self-sufficient, financially
viable public news service for the Internet community.
Head: Flame of the Internet
The product of Internet Talk Radio is an audio file,
professionally produced and freely available on computer networks. To
produce these files, we start with the raw data of any journalistic
endeavor: speeches, conference presentations, interviews, and essays.
This raw information is taped using professional-quality
microphones, mixers, and DAT recorders. The information is then
brought back to our studios, and edited and mixed with music, voice
overs, and the other elements of a radio program. The “look and feel”
we strive for is akin to “All Things Considered” or other programs
that appeal to the general interest of the intelligent listener.
Our goal is hit the topics that don’t make it into the trade
press. Instead of SNMP-compliant product announcements, we want to
present descriptions of SNMP. Instead of articles on GOSSIP, we want
to describe the latest Internet Drafts and place them in perspective.
Instead of executive promotions, we want to give summaries of mailing
list activity and network stability. Instead of COMDEX, we want to
cover the IETF.
Head: Town Crier to the Global Village
The result of Internet Talk Radio’s journalistic activities is
a series of audio files. The native format we start with is the Sun
Microsystems .au format, closely related to the NeXT .snd format.
This format consists of the CCITT Pulse Code Modulation (PCM) standard
of 8 bits per sample and a sampling rate of 8000 samples per second,
using the u-law [ed. use greek letter mu] encoding (a logarithmic
encoding of 8 bit data equivalent to a 14 bit linear encoding). A
half-hour program would thus consist of 64,000 bits per second or 15
Programs are initially spool on UUNET, the central machines of
the Alternet network. Files are then moved over to various regional
networks for further distribution. For example, EUnet, a commercial
network provider for Europe with service in 24 countries, will act as
the central spooling area for the European region. The Internet
Initiative Japan (IIJ) company will provide the same service for
The goal of coordinated distribution is to reduce the load on
key links of the network. Transferring a 15 Mbyte file over a 64 kbps
link does not make sense during peak times. On the other hand, a
leased line has the attribute that a bit unused is a bit forever gone.
Transferring large files at low priority in non-peak times has little
or no incremental cost.
Files thus move from the UUNET central spool area, to regional
spools, to national and local networks. We anticipate most of this
transfer to be done using the FTP protocols, but some networks are
discussing the use of NNTP news groups and MIME-based distribution
It is important to note that Internet Talk Radio is the source
of programming and does not control the distribution. These files are
publicly available, subject only to the simple license restrictions of
no derivative work and no commercial resale.
Distribution is controlled, as with all other data, by the
individual networks that make up the Internet. We intend to work
closely with networks all over the world to ensure that there is some
coordination of distribution activity, but ultimate control over this
data is in the hands of those people who finance, manage, and use
We don’t believe indiscriminate use of anonymous FTP is the
proper method for distributing large archives. Previous experience
with ITU standards, with RFC repositories, and with large software
archives such as the X Windows System indicates that setting up a
top-level distribution hierarchy goes a long way towards alleviating
Even with a top-level hierarchy, however, there will always be
anonymous FTP sites and there will always be people that go to the
wrong FTP server. This behavior is largely mitigated by setting up
enough “local” servers and publicizing their existence. Like any
large distributor of data, we are mindful of the load on the
transcontinental and regional infrastructures and will take aggressive
steps to help minimize that load.
Head: Asynchronous Times, Asynchronous Radio
Once files have made their way to a local or regional network,
they are moved to the desktop and played. Once again the individual
users of the network decide how to present data. We hope to see a
wide variety of different ways of having our files played and only
list a few of the more obvious methods.
The simplest method to play a .au file on a Sparcstation is to
type “play filename.” If the file is placed on a Network File System
(NFS) file system on a central server, the user simply mounts the file
system and plays the file. Alternatively, the user copies the file to
a local disk and plays it.
More adventuresome playing of files uses multicasting. A
simple multicast program called “radio” for a local Ethernet is
available from CWI, the mathematics institute of the Netherlands. A
more sophisticated approach, IP multicasting, allows a program to
reach far beyond the confines of the Ethernet.
IP multicasting might be used on a local basis, or can have a
global reach. There is a consortium of regional networks that have
formed the Multicast Backbone (MBONE), used for audio and video
programming of key conferences such as the Internet Engineering Task
Internet Talk Radio does not assume use of the MBONE for
playing files. Needless to say, the operators of the MBONE are free
to play Internet Talk Radio files (and we would be delighted if this
happens), but it is up to the local network affiliates to determine
how and when they distribute this audio data.
In many cases, people will want to play files on a wide
variety of different platforms. The Sound Exchange (SOX) program is a
publicly-available utility that easily transforms a file from one
format to another. Using this utility, the Macintosh, Silicon
Graphics, DECstation, PC, and many other platforms can play Internet
Talk Radio files.
Head: Geek of the Week
In the spirit of dignified, conservative programming, the
first production from Internet Talk Radio is dubbed Geek of the Week.
Geek of the Week features technical interviews with key personalities
on the Internet. Some of the people who have agreed to appear on Geek
of the Week include Daniel Karrenberg of the RIPE NCC, Dr. Marshall T.
Rose of Dover Beach Consulting, Milo Medin of the NASA Science
Internet, and Daniel Lynch of Interop Company.
Geek of the Week focuses on technical issues facing the
Internet. This initial program is sponsored by Sun Microsystems and
O’Reilly & Associates. Their support makes it possible for Geek of
the Week to be produced professionally and then to be distributed at
One of the issues that Internet Talk Radio faces are the
vestiges of Appropriate Use Policies (AUPs) that linger from the
original ARPANET days. While Sun Microsystems and O’Reilly &
Associates view Internet Talk Radio in terms of an investigation of
on-line publishing, of multicasting, and other engineering issues, we
feel it important that our sponsors are given due credit in the
At first glance, this smacks of the crass and commercial.
Indeed, it smacks of advertising. Jumping to that conclusion, however
would be a simplistic mistake. The Appropriate Use Policies were
formulated to guarantee that networks are used for the purposes
envisioned by the funding agents. In the case of an AUP-constrained
networks such as the NSFNET, this means that use of the network must
benefit U.S. science and engineering.
We feel that an in-depth interview with Internet architects
clearly falls within the purview of all AUP policies. However, we
understand that certain networks may not accept certain types of
programming. For this reason, our central spool areas are carefully
picked so they are AUP-free. This way, if a network feels the
programming is inappropriate, they can simply inform their users not
to obtain or play the files.
It should be noted that one advantage of supporting the
professional dissemination of news and information up-front is that
the user is not directly charged. Somebody has to pay for information
to be produced, and the sponsorship model means that copy protection,
accounting, security, and all the other complications of a charging
model are avoided and that high-quality news and information becomes
increasingly available on the Internet.
Head: The Medium is the Message
While Geek of the Week is our flagship program, we intend to
intersperse mini-features throughout. The Incidental Tourist, for
example, will feature restaurant reviews and other travel information
for sites throughout the world. The Internet Hall of Flame will
highlight non-linear behavior on mailing lists, and we will have
periodic book reviews by Dan Dorenberg, one of the founders of
Computer Literacy Books.
The logical extension to Geek of the Week is to begin coverage
of industry functions. To date, we have received permission to tape
for later rebroadcast sessions and presentations at the European RIPE
meetings, the IETF, and at the INTEROP Conferences. We are
negotiating with other industry forums to try and establish permission
to cover additional conferences.
Our hope is to begin providing news summaries of these key
conferences. If you can’t make it to the IETF, for example, Internet
Talk Radio would like to provide a half-hour news summary describing
what happened on each day.
The next logical step is to begin producing analysis of key
technical topics. Here, we look at in-depth (e.g., 15 minute)
summaries of technical topics such as MIME, proposals for the next IP,
SNMP v. 2, or the architecture of the Global Internet Exchange (GIX).
We would also furnish analysis of political topics, such as the POISED
effort to reorganize the Internet standards process, or the background
of the IPv7 debate.
Eventually, our hope is to combine all these reports together
and form a daily news broadcast to the Internet. When you walk in and
start reading your mail, you simply click on the “radio” icon and
listen to Geek of the Week while deleting messages from the more
hyperactive mailing lists.
Head: Tomorrow is the Future
The “radio” metaphor was carefully chosen. We wanted an
alternative to plain ASCII files, yet did not feel that the Internet
infrastructure was ready for regular video feeds. Production of video
or true multimedia required an order-of-magnitude higher investment in
production facilities. After all, we know bad TV since we see so much
Eventually, Internet Talk Radio wants to go beyond the
confines of the simple radio metaphor. Already, we describe the
service as asynchronous radio, recognizing that our listeners can
start, stop, rewind, or otherwise control the operation of the radio
As a multicasting infrastructure gets deployed throughout the
Internet, we see the opportunity to expand the radio metaphor and
begin the creation of a truly new news medium. Multicast groups and
videoconferencing tools allow the creation of an Internet Town Hall, a
moderated forum with a very wide reach or games shows like Name That
Acronym where everybody gets to play.
Because we are on the Internet, we can add a wide variety of
different programming techniques. While listening to a series of
interviews about MIME messaging, for example, you might also scroll
through a series of Gopher menus that hold more information about the
MIME standards, or search a WAIS database for a biography of the
We hope that Internet Talk Radio will be the first of many
such information services on the Internet, supplementing the random
anarchy of news and mailing lists with professionally produced news
and information. Indeed, we hope that Internet Talk Radio forms the
first of many “desktop broadcasting” efforts.
Internet Talk Radio debuts at the Columbus IETF at the end of
March. Stay tuned for more information.
Head: For More Information
Guido van Rossum, FAQ: Audio File Formats,
ftp.cwi.nl:/pub/AudioFormats2.10. An excellent introduction to
audio formats, encoding, and other information about sound files
on different platforms. This same site also has copies of the
SoundExchange (SOX) program for translating files into different
audio formats, and the Radio program for playing a sound file on
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1993 13:08:37 EDT
From: “by way of Terry Winograd <firstname.lastname@example.org>”
Subject: File 4–Call for Stories — Reasons to Build the NII
Please circulate this announcement to any person or list you think
would be interested in responding. We’re looking forward to hearing
CALL FOR STORIES:
51 Reasons to Invest in the National Information Infrastructure
FARNET (the Federation of American Research Networks) is launching a
national search for good stories about how and why people use the
Internet in education, research, health care, libraries and
Right now, Congress is considering ways to expand and build upon the
successes of the Internet. The stage is being set for the creation of
a ‘national information infrastructure’ computer and communications
sytems that will make it possible for Americans to access and use all
kinds of electronic information in the 21st century. Your stories
will help set the agenda for the national information infrastructure.
We must receive your story submission by March 31, 1993. Because
critical information policy issues are already being debated, the
timetable for the
first round of the project is short.
This summer a collection of the stories including at least one from each
state and the District of Columbia will be published in an illustrated
booklet and delivered to members of Congress, other elected officials, and
Every story submitted that satisfies the criteria for publication will be
included in a public database, accessible from the Internet and indexed so
that it is easy to retrieve all stories from a particular region or about a
WHAT to Submit
Each story should focus on only one use of the Internet, or one
network-supported project. For instance, it might describe a collaboration
between bilingual eighth-grade classes in different states, or a rural
health-information delivery system. The story should be short (600 words
or fewer) and should describe the use of the network and explain how the
ability to use the network was of direct benefit to the activity supported.
Specific details, examples and quotations will make the story more
readable. Do not include material that does not support the
Photographs and illustrations will be included in the printed booklet
but not in the story database (for the first round). To submit a
graphic, please mail camera-ready artwork (for charts, illustrations,
or graphs) or photographic prints (any size, in black and white or
color) to the address below.
We welcome submissions of videos, software, computer graphics,
documentation, and other supporting information and will index these
as part of the story database.
WHO Should Submit
Anyone may submit a story for consideration.
HOW to Submit
We prefer that you submit stories electronically to the Internet
address below. You may also submit them by fax or postal mail. You
must use the Story Submission Form at the end of this announcement so
that we can readily enter the stories into the database.
FARNET’s address is:
Postal mail: FARNET, 100 Fifth Avenue, Waltham, MA 02154
Phone: (800) 72-FARNET
Fax: (617) 890-5117
CRITERIA for Publication
To be included in the database, stories must describe how access to or
use of the Internet for education, research, health care, libraries or
manufacturing resulted in one or more of the following:
Innovative or improved ways of doing things
More equitable access to technology or electronic information
Creation of new ideas, products, or services
Local investment in, commitment to, and control of network-based
Leverage of public funding
Volunteer contributions of time and energy
Partnerships between public sector and private sector organizations
Other social, economic or educational benefits
THE PANEL of Reviewers
The review panel for the stories to be included in the booklet will
consist of eight people representing key public sector interests in
networking, including libraries, education, health care, and economic
development. One of these representatives will be named by FARNET.
The others will be named by other national organizations, including
the Coalition for Networked Information, the Consortium for School
Networking, Educom’s NTTF, and the Science and Technology Council of
NOTIFICATION of Acceptance
All submissions will be acknowledged upon receipt. If a submission is
incomplete, the author will receive a comment sheet and will have the
opportunity to amend the submission for inclusion in the database.
The Story Submission Form requires each author to grant FARNET a
non-exclusive, royalty-free copyright license to use his or her story
for the purposes described in this Call for Stories. All stories must
be original with the author, and the author must have obtained
permission to use the names of any person or organization identified
in the story.
WHAT is FARNET?
FARNET is a national non-profit association dedicated to advancing the
use of computer networks for research and education. Its members are
network service providers and other organizations that support its
PROJECT Underwriters (to date)
Coalition for Networked Information
National Science Foundation
— cut here —
Story Submission Form
1. Your name
City, State, ZIP:
2. Person to contact for more information, if different from above
City, State, ZIP:
3. Put an “X” before the category of use or user that this story
…….Education, continuing or distance
…….Health care/health services
…….Opportunities for people with disabilities
4. Put an “X” before all the criteria that you believe this story
…….Innovative or improved ways of doing things
…….More equitable access to technology or electronic information
…….Creation of new ideas, products, or services
…….Local commitment to network-based activities
…….Leverage of public funding
…….Volunteer contributions of time and energy
…….Partnerships between public and private sector
5. Story text (600 word maximum): Please include the
organization(s) involved, the objectives of the project and the
benefits. Use full names of people, places and organizations.
Don’t forget to address at least one of the areas listed above
in the criteria for inclusion.
6. Put an “X” in front of all categories of supporting information
…….Computer graphic images, such as GIF files
7. Story site if different from contact information:
Town or City:
8. COPYRIGHT LICENSE AND WARRANTY
I, the author listed below, hereby grant to FARNET, Inc., and
its sublicensees, the following non-exclusive, royalty-free
irrevocable licenses with respect to the enclosed story (the “Story”)
submitted in response to FARNET’s solicitation dated February 12, 1993
entitled “51 Reasons to Build the National Information
To edit, copy, distribute, and make the Story generally accessible
through one or more free public databases; and,
(At FARNET’s option) to edit, copy, and distribute the Story in one or
more printed collections of stories for non-commercial use consistent
with FARNET’s organizational purposes.
My grant of these rights is in consideration of FARNET’s
agreement to make the Story available on a public database as
described in the first subparagraph above if the Story meets FARNET’s
I will retain copyright in the Story. (It is understood that
FARNET’s right to modify the Story is limited to non-substantive
editorial modifications.) FARNET will, through appropriate copyright
notices and other legends, reasonably attempt to restrict any
commercial use of the Story, but FARNET will not be liable to me if
another party does not abide by these attempted restrictions. FARNET
may grant to other noncommercial organizations sublicenses to any of
the rights granted by me to FARNET.
I acknowledge and warrant to FARNET and its sublicensees that
Story is original with me, and that I have permission to use the names
and/or descriptions of any individuals or organizations which are
identified in the Story. I give FARNET and its sublicensees
permission to use my name in connection with the rights granted above.
I HAVE READ AND AGREE TO THE ABOVE COPYRIGHT LICENSE AND WARRANTY.
(Sign name, if submitting by postal mail; otherwise, typing
your name for Email transmission constitutes the equivalent of your
FARNET’s address is:
Mail: FARNET, 100 Fifth Avenue, Waltham, MA 02154
Phone: (800) 72-FARNET
Fax: (617) 890-5117
End of Computer Underground Digest #5.19