Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 (Fortune 01.1b1); site pid.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!akgub!pid!pwd
From: pwd@pid.UUCP (Philip W. Dalrymple)
Newsgroups: net.news,net.news.group
Subject: Re: Net censorship (PLEASE READ)
Message-ID: <200@pid.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 11-Nov-85 06:53:23 EST
Article-I.D.: pid.200
Posted: Mon Nov 11 06:53:23 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 12-Nov-85 04:22:25 EST
References: <530@aero.ARPA>
Reply-To: pwd@pid.UUCP (Philip W. Dalrymple)
Organization: P & I Design, Inc. Atlanta
Lines: 48
Keywords: censorship
Xref: watmath net.news:4325 net.news.group:4459
Summary: 

Followup-To:

In article <530@aero.ARPA> kremen@aero.UUCP (Gary Kremen (5731)) writes:
>
>A new moderated group mod.computer.ibm-pc has filtered its way to sites.
>Close examination of the group's welcoming message reveals the
>moderators of this group will and do censor out all information with
>respect to copy-protection. They state:
>> Two topics are taboo and are routinely edited out:
>> (1) .....
>> (2) anything about copy-protection
>
>I am not posting this to debate the merits of copy-protection. It is not
>the issue. The issue is whether the moderators of any USENET moderated
>group have the right to censor at will.
>

I am going to debate the merits of debating the merits of copy-protection.

I assume (and know that that is a bad thing) that any debate about the
use of copy-protection would be allowed in other words it you wanted to
talk about why it was a good or bad thing.  On the other hand and talk
about how to break copy-protection would be a no-no and for good reason
if this were not limited P&ID for one would not carry that group.  We
expect that the moderators or SA's at the posting sites will see to it
that there are no legal problems with the submissions from there sites.
I take care of that for pid.

>
> "Moderators are expressedly prohibited from making ANY changes on
> submitted articles except for the following:
>  i)   To eliminate spelling or grammer errors.
>  ii)  To format an article's text in a physically different form.
>  iii) To combine repetitive questions, requests, or replies into a
>       single question, request, or reply."
>

As stated above the moderatore should not post any articles with legal
problems.  This should be added to the list of things that moderators
should do.

iv) To eliminate ANY questionable passages in the artical with respect
    to legal isues.  (reference should be made in the article to the
    effect that text was removed and why.)


-- 
Philip Dalrymple
akgua!pid!pwd
404/429-8266 (voice)