Human-Nets-Request@RED.RUTGERS.EDU (Charles McGrew, The Moderator) (10/15/85)
HUMAN-NETS Digest Monday, 14 Oct 1985 Volume 8 : Issue 34
Today's Topics:
Computers and the Law - Slander vs. Libel,
Computer Networks - Email Addressing (2 msgs),
Announcements - MIT Communications Forum &
New Mailing List &
New Digest Service
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun 13 Oct 85 19:41:32-PDT
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Slander vs. Libel
An interesting question for Human-Nets. The answer may depend partly
on whether the injured party has the opportunity to respond to the
original audience if redress is found appropriate.
-- Ken Laws
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 85 07:22:09 pdt
From: edsel!jim@su-navajo.arpa (Jim McDonald)
Subject: slander vs. libel
Technically, of course, the discussions [on SU-BBoards] so far have
been about libel, not slander, unless people are also verbalizing
their thoughts. This observation, plus my experience with speech
synthesizers, led me to wonder if machine-generated speech would
be libel or slander, assuming it was one of the two.
(Assume also that someone typed in normal sentences, which the
machine merely transduced to speech.) I suppose only a lawyer
would care...
jim mcdonald
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 85 13:20 EDT
From: Robert W. Kerns <RWK@SCRC-YUKON.ARPA>
Subject: Towards a more 'human' method of e-mail addressing (SOLVED!)
To: BostonU SysMgr <root%bostonu.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Date: Sun, 29 Sep 85 14:48:48 edt
From: BostonU SysMgr <root%bostonu.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Dave Taylor of HP suggests that the US Postal system method of
addressing be used as a model for electronic mail. The argument
goes that a child can manage to use the US Postal system.
...
Actually, a more obvious candidate for a model that works quite
well is the phone system. ...
How many of you out there keep lists of people's phone #s and
e-mail addresses? A lot I bet, why not consolidate (and hey! you
can then maybe use 555-1212 and phone books to possibly get
peoples e-mail addresses, for a very small amount of $$ listings
could be added like:
...
"Gack!"
-- Bill the Cat
"Computers plot takeover of our minds!"
-- National Enquirer
I will just observe that I keep a list of people's phone #'s (and
several phone books), yet I successfully keep ALL the mail addresses I
use in my head. (With the exception of UUCP routes, of course).
How many phone numbers do YOU remember?
People adapt to numbers because they must, not because it is easy.
-- Bob "Not a number" Kerns, RWK@SCRC.Symbolics.Com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 85 11:36:48 EDT
From: Frank Ritter <ritter@BBN-LABS-B.ARPA>
To: human-nets@rutgers.ARPA
Subject: re: logical mail addresses
Quite a few people in their flames about addresses have forgotten how
the current system has come about. It is a kludged together system,
with parts taken from many systems, and not all designed at once, and
not all at the same cost. Mail costs money through connect time on
the machine, (who will pay for a machine for a specific domain?),
phone lines or the equivalent (why isn't Boston University on csnet
and not arpa? cost. uucp is orders of magnitude cheaper), and the
politics of setting up the net (do you want to tell someone that half
his cycles will go to routing mail to his competitors machine?).
Please be reasonable in the schemes you propose. I don't do
networks, but the above observations will have to be dealt with in any
proposal.
Frank Ritter(not associated in anyway with people doing networks
at BBN)
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 85 13:49 EDT
From: Kahin@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA
Subject: MIT Communications Forum
To: Telecom@USC-ECLC.ARPA, *bboard@MIT-MC.ARPA,
decvax!ittvax!hagouel@UCB-VAX.ARPA, DEPhillips@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA,
Kaden.BNRRich@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA, Quirk.BNRRich@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA,
Sirbu@GAUSS.ECE.CMU.EDU
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Communications Forum
Making Electronic Mail More Intelligent
October 31, 1985
Thomas Malone, MIT
Kenneth Mayers, Digital Equipment Corporation
Electronic messaging has become a familiar feature of the
office environment and a key element in office automation
strategy for many organizations. As these systems spread, many
issues must be dealt with, such as accomodating evolving user
requirements, responding to rapid expansion, controlling junk
mail, and incorporating alternative technologies. One of the
central challenges is how to enhance messaging features so that
users are not swamped by information overload.
This forum will present the experience of Digital Equipment
Corporation, one of the pioneering users of electronic mail, and
will describe some recent innovative research at MIT which uses
artificial intelligence technology to improve the user's ability
to sort incoming messages by relevance and urgency and to route
outgoing communications to the most appropriate people within the
organizations.
Electronic Media and the First Amendment
November 7, 1985
While the First Amendment to the Constitution has been
interpreted to grant print publishers nearly unabridged freedom
of expression, electronic broadcast media have been regulated on
the grounds of "spectrum scarcity." Regulation of cable
television has been justified on a number of premises: use of
public streets; "natural monopoly" characteristics; and its close
relationship to broadcasting.
Recently, a number of important court decisions have
indicated that cable operators should be treated more like print
publishers than broadcasters for First Amendment purposes. One
of these decisions struck down the "must carry" rule, which
required cable systems to carry all broadcast stations within a
certain radius. This seminar will consider the impact of these
decisions on both the cable and broadcast industries and, in
particular, whether rapidly expanding channel capacity and new
delivery technologies undermine traditional justifications for
limiting First Amendment rights of the electronic media.
The Impact of the Divestiture
November 14, 1985
Lisa Rosenblum, New York Public Service Commission, Consumer Division
Paul Levy, Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities
Gayle Ruedi, AT&T Customer Services/MIT
There has been more choice but also more confusion in the
telecommunications industry since the breakup of the 107 year-old
Bell System last year. Both residential and business users are
faced with complex tradeoffs among products, services, and
prices -- in a market which is in constant technological flux.
State regulatory agencies have found their established practices
challenged by the changes climate and have had to reassess what
their role should be. The divestiture has had a particularly
profound effect on AT&T, which has had to shed its monopoly
mindset and establish an image as a "new," competitive company,
while reassuring customers that it continues to offer state-of-
the-art technology and service.
Software Dissemination:
First Sale and Shrink-Wrap Licensing
November 21, 1985
David Waterman, Annenberg School of Communication, USC
Robert Bigelow, Bigelow and Saltzberg
Robert McEwen, Boston College
Home video technology seemed to promise motion picture
studios a new revenue stream from selling movies in the form of a
product that consumers would purchase and collect. In practice,
the studios found themselves whipsawed by the "first sale"
doctrine: If they marketed videocassettes as a product, copies
could be rented by retailers without paying royalties.
Alternatively, they could pursue a "rental only" strategy --
leasing copies to distributors and retailers, who could then only
rent to consumers, returning royalties for each rental. The
middlemen resisted "rental only" plans and outright sale
prevailed. The studios, in turn, asked Congress to modify the
law for audio-visual works. They failed, but the law was amended
for sound recordings, which aborted the development of record
rental services.
Although a bill to modify the first sale doctrine for
computer software was introduced in the Senate, software
producers have generally sought to characterize retail
transactions as licensing agreements. But instead of having
dealers rent the software, the industry has relied on "shrink-
wrap licenses", which purport to create a lease upon the opening
of the package.
Are shrink-wrap licenses enforceable? Can they
effectively transform sales into leases and goods into services?
When should the first sale doctrine apply? This seminar will
survey the law and then look at the economic and policy issues.
High-Definition Television
December 5, 1985
Robert Hopkins, National Association of Broadcasters
Kerns Powers, RCA
Edward Horowitz, Home Box Office
The broadcast television system that has served America for
the past thirty years is undergoing revision at all levels. New
technologies have been developed that equal or exceed the quality
of theatrical film, and the level of effort in research labs and
industry has raised the issue of a new standard that will allow
high quality world-wide program interchange. One system,
designed by NHK in Japan, will have been proposed as a production
standard at the October meeting of the CCIR, and the CCIR
recommendations will be known by the date of this seminar. The
speakers invited will discuss this standard and various other
approaches to high quality television.
4:00 - 6:00
Bartos Theater for the Moving Image
The Wiesner Building
(Center for Arts and Media Technology)
(Building E15 Lower Level)
20 Ames Street
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Cambridge, Massachusetts
For further information call 617-253-3144.
------------------------------
To: veeger!hpcnof!hplabs!Human-Nets@red.rutgers.edu
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 85 16:30:02 MDT
From: Dave Taylor <hpcnou!dat%hplabs.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: New (related) mailing list...
(I hope no-one minds me using this as a publicity forum, but I
think that this is a reasonably like-minded new mailing group starting
up that it's worth the overlap - Dave)
From: The Computers-and-Society Moderator
I'm starting a new mailing list for the express purpose of
discussing the ramifications of computers and information on society.
The title of this group is "Computers and Society" and among the areas
I'd like to see us discuss are:
Computers and Social Responsibility
Philosophical issues of using computers
Psychological barriers to acceptance of computers
Why computers are viewed as 'omniscient' (and are they?)
How much information is "too much"?
How can we deal with information overload?
What of non-technically oriented people? Are they getting
their fair share of the information available?
Are we move towards a classed society: Those that have the
information and those that don't?
How far is society from the Orwellian vision of 1984?
Is the media blowing computers all out of proportion? Is
there anything we can do about it?
User Interfaces (from the 'outside in', rather than the
implementation details - NO PROGRAMS PLEASE!)
< and so on >
After being on a number of different mailing lists, I've found that
the most readable and pleasant form is to 'digest' it and mail a set
of messages to the entire membership of the group in digest form.
(please see Human-Nets for an example of a "digest form" mailing list)
-------------
To join this group, contribute to the discussion, or whatever,
please send mail to me at any of the below addresses (please include
an address for yourself based on one of the major hubs, like 'ihnp4'
or 'decvax'):
USENET: ...ihnp4!hpfcla!d_taylor
or ...hplabs!hpcnof!dat
ARPANET: hpcnou!dat@HPLABS.CSNET-RELAY
CSNET: hpcnou!dat@HPLABS
Depending on the flow of messages, a digest will be mailed out
about once a week (I'll try to keep them managable, though, so if
we're on a "roll" it'll increase...).
--------------
The first issue of the Computers and Society Digest will be
mailed out on or about the 19th of October so keep in touch!
-- Dave Taylor
------------------------------
Date: Tue 8 Oct 85 12:20:53-PDT
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: New Digest Service
Stay Alert
EE's Tools & Toys column, Coordinator M.A. Fischetti
IEEE Spectrum, Volume 22, No. 10, 10/85, p. 86
The new monthly Telecommunications Alert, a 16-page newsletter,
publishes highly condensed forms of 75 to 85 news items from 220
telecommunications and related publications. The digest highlights
breaking developments from telecom newspapers, magazines, newsletters,
books, journals, and government reports, identified by name, date, and
page number of the source publication, with address and phone number.
TA is currently offering a 20% discount on new subscriptions, plus a
copy of "The Telecommunication Manager's (Plain-English) Guide to
Practical Technologies". [...]
A seven-month trial subscription is %89; a full-year subscription is
$149. To order or to request more information, write to
Telecommunications Alert, One Park Avenue, New York, NY 10157;
telephone (800) 221-2618 except in NY state (212) 683-3899.
------------------------------
End of HUMAN-NETS Digest
************************human-nets@cca.UUCP (10/16/85)
From: Charles McGrew (The Moderator) <Human-Nets-Request@Rutgers>
HUMAN-NETS Digest Monday, 14 Oct 1985 Volume 8 : Issue 34
Today's Topics:
Computers and the Law - Slander vs. Libel,
Computer Networks - Email Addressing (2 msgs),
Announcements - MIT Communications Forum &
New Mailing List &
New Digest Service
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun 13 Oct 85 19:41:32-PDT
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Slander vs. Libel
An interesting question for Human-Nets. The answer may depend partly
on whether the injured party has the opportunity to respond to the
original audience if redress is found appropriate.
-- Ken Laws
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 85 07:22:09 pdt
From: edsel!jim@su-navajo.arpa (Jim McDonald)
Subject: slander vs. libel
Technically, of course, the discussions [on SU-BBoards] so far have
been about libel, not slander, unless people are also verbalizing
their thoughts. This observation, plus my experience with speech
synthesizers, led me to wonder if machine-generated speech would
be libel or slander, assuming it was one of the two.
(Assume also that someone typed in normal sentences, which the
machine merely transduced to speech.) I suppose only a lawyer
would care...
jim mcdonald
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 85 13:20 EDT
From: Robert W. Kerns <RWK@SCRC-YUKON.ARPA>
Subject: Towards a more 'human' method of e-mail addressing (SOLVED!)
To: BostonU SysMgr <root%bostonu.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Date: Sun, 29 Sep 85 14:48:48 edt
From: BostonU SysMgr <root%bostonu.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Dave Taylor of HP suggests that the US Postal system method of
addressing be used as a model for electronic mail. The argument
goes that a child can manage to use the US Postal system.
...
Actually, a more obvious candidate for a model that works quite
well is the phone system. ...
How many of you out there keep lists of people's phone #s and
e-mail addresses? A lot I bet, why not consolidate (and hey! you
can then maybe use 555-1212 and phone books to possibly get
peoples e-mail addresses, for a very small amount of $$ listings
could be added like:
...
"Gack!"
-- Bill the Cat
"Computers plot takeover of our minds!"
-- National Enquirer
I will just observe that I keep a list of people's phone #'s (and
several phone books), yet I successfully keep ALL the mail addresses I
use in my head. (With the exception of UUCP routes, of course).
How many phone numbers do YOU remember?
People adapt to numbers because they must, not because it is easy.
-- Bob "Not a number" Kerns, RWK@SCRC.Symbolics.Com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 85 11:36:48 EDT
From: Frank Ritter <ritter@BBN-LABS-B.ARPA>
To: human-nets@rutgers.ARPA
Subject: re: logical mail addresses
Quite a few people in their flames about addresses have forgotten how
the current system has come about. It is a kludged together system,
with parts taken from many systems, and not all designed at once, and
not all at the same cost. Mail costs money through connect time on
the machine, (who will pay for a machine for a specific domain?),
phone lines or the equivalent (why isn't Boston University on csnet
and not arpa? cost. uucp is orders of magnitude cheaper), and the
politics of setting up the net (do you want to tell someone that half
his cycles will go to routing mail to his competitors machine?).
Please be reasonable in the schemes you propose. I don't do
networks, but the above observations will have to be dealt with in any
proposal.
Frank Ritter(not associated in anyway with people doing networks
at BBN)
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 85 13:49 EDT
From: Kahin@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA
Subject: MIT Communications Forum
To: Telecom@USC-ECLC.ARPA, *bboard@MIT-MC.ARPA,
decvax!ittvax!hagouel@UCB-VAX.ARPA, DEPhillips@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA,
Kaden.BNRRich@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA, Quirk.BNRRich@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA,
Sirbu@GAUSS.ECE.CMU.EDU
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Communications Forum
Making Electronic Mail More Intelligent
October 31, 1985
Thomas Malone, MIT
Kenneth Mayers, Digital Equipment Corporation
Electronic messaging has become a familiar feature of the
office environment and a key element in office automation
strategy for many organizations. As these systems spread, many
issues must be dealt with, such as accomodating evolving user
requirements, responding to rapid expansion, controlling junk
mail, and incorporating alternative technologies. One of the
central challenges is how to enhance messaging features so that
users are not swamped by information overload.
This forum will present the experience of Digital Equipment
Corporation, one of the pioneering users of electronic mail, and
will describe some recent innovative research at MIT which uses
artificial intelligence technology to improve the user's ability
to sort incoming messages by relevance and urgency and to route
outgoing communications to the most appropriate people within the
organizations.
Electronic Media and the First Amendment
November 7, 1985
While the First Amendment to the Constitution has been
interpreted to grant print publishers nearly unabridged freedom
of expression, electronic broadcast media have been regulated on
the grounds of "spectrum scarcity." Regulation of cable
television has been justified on a number of premises: use of
public streets; "natural monopoly" characteristics; and its close
relationship to broadcasting.
Recently, a number of important court decisions have
indicated that cable operators should be treated more like print
publishers than broadcasters for First Amendment purposes. One
of these decisions struck down the "must carry" rule, which
required cable systems to carry all broadcast stations within a
certain radius. This seminar will consider the impact of these
decisions on both the cable and broadcast industries and, in
particular, whether rapidly expanding channel capacity and new
delivery technologies undermine traditional justifications for
limiting First Amendment rights of the electronic media.
The Impact of the Divestiture
November 14, 1985
Lisa Rosenblum, New York Public Service Commission, Consumer Division
Paul Levy, Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities
Gayle Ruedi, AT&T Customer Services/MIT
There has been more choice but also more confusion in the
telecommunications industry since the breakup of the 107 year-old
Bell System last year. Both residential and business users are
faced with complex tradeoffs among products, services, and
prices -- in a market which is in constant technological flux.
State regulatory agencies have found their established practices
challenged by the changes climate and have had to reassess what
their role should be. The divestiture has had a particularly
profound effect on AT&T, which has had to shed its monopoly
mindset and establish an image as a "new," competitive company,
while reassuring customers that it continues to offer state-of-
the-art technology and service.
Software Dissemination:
First Sale and Shrink-Wrap Licensing
November 21, 1985
David Waterman, Annenberg School of Communication, USC
Robert Bigelow, Bigelow and Saltzberg
Robert McEwen, Boston College
Home video technology seemed to promise motion picture
studios a new revenue stream from selling movies in the form of a
product that consumers would purchase and collect. In practice,
the studios found themselves whipsawed by the "first sale"
doctrine: If they marketed videocassettes as a product, copies
could be rented by retailers without paying royalties.
Alternatively, they could pursue a "rental only" strategy --
leasing copies to distributors and retailers, who could then only
rent to consumers, returning royalties for each rental. The
middlemen resisted "rental only" plans and outright sale
prevailed. The studios, in turn, asked Congress to modify the
law for audio-visual works. They failed, but the law was amended
for sound recordings, which aborted the development of record
rental services.
Although a bill to modify the first sale doctrine for
computer software was introduced in the Senate, software
producers have generally sought to characterize retail
transactions as licensing agreements. But instead of having
dealers rent the software, the industry has relied on "shrink-
wrap licenses", which purport to create a lease upon the opening
of the package.
Are shrink-wrap licenses enforceable? Can they
effectively transform sales into leases and goods into services?
When should the first sale doctrine apply? This seminar will
survey the law and then look at the economic and policy issues.
High-Definition Television
December 5, 1985
Robert Hopkins, National Association of Broadcasters
Kerns Powers, RCA
Edward Horowitz, Home Box Office
The broadcast television system that has served America for
the past thirty years is undergoing revision at all levels. New
technologies have been developed that equal or exceed the quality
of theatrical film, and the level of effort in research labs and
industry has raised the issue of a new standard that will allow
high quality world-wide program interchange. One system,
designed by NHK in Japan, will have been proposed as a production
standard at the October meeting of the CCIR, and the CCIR
recommendations will be known by the date of this seminar. The
speakers invited will discuss this standard and various other
approaches to high quality television.
4:00 - 6:00
Bartos Theater for the Moving Image
The Wiesner Building
(Center for Arts and Media Technology)
(Building E15 Lower Level)
20 Ames Street
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Cambridge, Massachusetts
For further information call 617-253-3144.
------------------------------
To: veeger!hpcnof!hplabs!Human-Nets@red.rutgers.edu
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 85 16:30:02 MDT
From: Dave Taylor <hpcnou!dat%hplabs.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: New (related) mailing list...
(I hope no-one minds me using this as a publicity forum, but I
think that this is a reasonably like-minded new mailing group starting
up that it's worth the overlap - Dave)
From: The Computers-and-Society Moderator
I'm starting a new mailing list for the express purpose of
discussing the ramifications of computers and information on society.
The title of this group is "Computers and Society" and among the areas
I'd like to see us discuss are:
Computers and Social Responsibility
Philosophical issues of using computers
Psychological barriers to acceptance of computers
Why computers are viewed as 'omniscient' (and are they?)
How much information is "too much"?
How can we deal with information overload?
What of non-technically oriented people? Are they getting
their fair share of the information available?
Are we move towards a classed society: Those that have the
information and those that don't?
How far is society from the Orwellian vision of 1984?
Is the media blowing computers all out of proportion? Is
there anything we can do about it?
User Interfaces (from the 'outside in', rather than the
implementation details - NO PROGRAMS PLEASE!)
< and so on >
After being on a number of different mailing lists, I've found that
the most readable and pleasant form is to 'digest' it and mail a set
of messages to the entire membership of the group in digest form.
(please see Human-Nets for an example of a "digest form" mailing list)
-------------
To join this group, contribute to the discussion, or whatever,
please send mail to me at any of the below addresses (please include
an address for yourself based on one of the major hubs, like 'ihnp4'
or 'decvax'):
USENET: ...ihnp4!hpfcla!d_taylor
or ...hplabs!hpcnof!dat
ARPANET: hpcnou!dat@HPLABS.CSNET-RELAY
CSNET: hpcnou!dat@HPLABS
Depending on the flow of messages, a digest will be mailed out
about once a week (I'll try to keep them managable, though, so if
we're on a "roll" it'll increase...).
--------------
The first issue of the Computers and Society Digest will be
mailed out on or about the 19th of October so keep in touch!
-- Dave Taylor
------------------------------
Date: Tue 8 Oct 85 12:20:53-PDT
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: New Digest Service
Stay Alert
EE's Tools & Toys column, Coordinator M.A. Fischetti
IEEE Spectrum, Volume 22, No. 10, 10/85, p. 86
The new monthly Telecommunications Alert, a 16-page newsletter,
publishes highly condensed forms of 75 to 85 news items from 220
telecommunications and related publications. The digest highlights
breaking developments from telecom newspapers, magazines, newsletters,
books, journals, and government reports, identified by name, date, and
page number of the source publication, with address and phone number.
TA is currently offering a 20% discount on new subscriptions, plus a
copy of "The Telecommunication Manager's (Plain-English) Guide to
Practical Technologies". [...]
A seven-month trial subscription is %89; a full-year subscription is
$149. To order or to request more information, write to
Telecommunications Alert, One Park Avenue, New York, NY 10157;
telephone (800) 221-2618 except in NY state (212) 683-3899.
------------------------------
End of HUMAN-NETS Digest
************************