response 1 of 83:

Feb 10 17:25 UTC 1996

  Even though its a graphic, I think we should.  We need to be counted.

response 3 of 83:

Feb 10 18:25 UTC 1996

Sounds good, srw.  Thanks.

response 5 of 83:

Feb 10 19:42 UTC 1996

Oh, please don't worry. There is a whole potload of graphics at the eff site.
I'll just point to one of theirs. They won't mind. There's no need to send
any graphics over *our* link to get it to appear on our page. HTML is cool.

I'm dialed into Grex async right now, but the next time I'm on the net with
IP, I'll set it up on our welcome site. It will only take a few minutes.

response 7 of 83:

Feb 11 00:07 UTC 1996

On a more physical note, I've bought a spool of blue ribbon and
some safety pins.  I'll be providing either or both to anyone
who wants to wear a blue ribbon at the next Board meeting, and
the next GNO i actually manage to attend.

response 9 of 83:

Feb 11 00:55 UTC 1996

On graphical browsers, you don't *need* to wait for a picture to download
before reading the text.  I expect most of the users who visit our
page will either wait for the ribbon to download once, to see what
it is, or just zip off to another page and not worry about it.

Of course, we could just put a copy of the picture on Grex, but I
would oppose that on principle.

If someone can put it in a personal account on another system (like
HVCN or Isthmus), that would probably be the best solution.

response 11 of 83:

Feb 11 05:24 UTC 1996

I can put it in my personal account on Isthmus.  I'm not sure how long that
account will be around, but we can move it when the time comes.

response 13 of 83:

Feb 11 08:41 UTC 1996

  A single slow-loading image may or may not hold up display of
an entire page, depending on the browser, its settings, and how
the image is referenced (if it includes width & height, the text
layout can be completed before the image download is initiated).
Blue ribbons were definitely slowing down my web surfing the other
night, in a big way, and the EFF site may be slow until they (or
their ISP) upgrade their 'Net link, due to all the new links
pointing to them.  On the other hand, if everyone is pointing
to the same blue ribbon on EFF's machine, it will often be in
people's caches, eliminating the need for retransmission.

response 15 of 83:

Feb 12 00:52 UTC 1996

Unless srw says no, the graphic is welcome on HVCN, 

response 17 of 83:

Feb 12 21:17 UTC 1996

   Sounds excellent to me, Steve.

response 19 of 83:

Feb 14 02:09 UTC 1996

Good idea to support the blue ribbon campaign.

response 21 of 83:

Feb 15 02:16 UTC 1996

        I have been searching in vain for the actual text of the indecent
parts of the new Telecommunications Act.
        Or, more precisely, I found the exact text, but it didn't do me
any good.
        The Telecom Act is not a new, "free-standing" act.  Instead, it
is about 100 pages of line-by-line amendments to *other* acts, such
as the old Communications Act of 1934!  I found the indecency part,
but since I didn't have the underlying acts it amended, the text of
the amendments was useless.
        I haven't found the "exception" for outfits like Grex or Arbornet
either.
        The gutter media haven't been much help.  They are just reprinting
each others' stories and haven't bothered to state exactly what duties
are imposed on what entities.
        If anyone can lead me to some document which pastes the old acts
and the amendments, I would be eternally grateful.  Well, for a while,
at least.   8-)
        Also, the Arbornet Board of Directors will meet this Sunday,
2/18, at 7:00 p.m. in the NEW Center, 1100 N. Main.  We will be considering
a variety of measures in response to the Telecom Act, including shutting
the system off to minors.  Grexxers interested in this issue might want
to drop by.  Of course, *considering* various things is no guarantee
that the Board will actually *adopt* anything...

response 23 of 83:

Feb 17 03:44 UTC 1996

Thanx to Joe Saul (seldon) on M-Net, here is the heart of the new language
in the Telecom Act which applies to Grex:

Section 502(1)(d):
        Whoever--
        (1) in interstate or foreign commerce knowingly -
                (A) uses an interactive computer service to send to
                        a specific person or persons under 18 years of age, or
                (b) uses any interactive computer service to display in
                        a manner available to a person under 18 years of age,

                any comment, request, suggestion, proposal, image, or other
                communication that, in context, depicts or describes, in
                terms patently offensive as measured by contemporary
                community standards, sexual or excretory activities or
                organs, regardless of whether the user of such service
                placed the call or initiated the communication; or

        (2) knowingly permits any telecommunications facility under such
                person's control to be used for an activity prohibited by
                paragraph (1) with the intent that it be used for such
                activity,

shall be fined under title 18, United States Code, or imprisoned not
more than two years, or both.

Section 502(1)(e):

In addition to any other defenses available by law:
        (1)  No person shall be held to hae violated subsection ... (d)
                solely for providing access or connection to or from a
                facility, system, or network not under that person's
                control, including transmission, downloading, intermediate
                storage, access software, or other related capabilities 
                that are incidental to providing such access or connection
                that does not include the creation of the content
                of the communication.

End of statute.

        Comments:  (d) applies to *users* who do "bad" things on inter-
active computer services (such as CompuServe, M-Net, and Grex).  It
doesn't apply to the services themselves.
        If that were not enough protection, (e) expressly says that
entities like Grex, et al., are not liable if they just pass this
stuff around and don't create the content.
        So while *users* have their freedoms restricted, the Act does
not appear, at my first (and second) reading to impose any liability
on services such as M-Net and Grex.