[net.general] new twist on computer "crime" and law

falcone@erlang.DEC (Joe Falcone, HLO2-3/N03, dtn 225-6059) (09/24/84)

CC:	 



For those of you following the "work-at-home" legal debate which
has surrounded some New England knitters, there is an interesting twist
to that story which hits close to home.  As part of the relentless
effort by the International Ladies Garment Workers Union to maintain
that law, the AFL-CIO has passed resolutions indicating their position on
other "work-at-home" situations.  In particular, they passed a resolution
favoring the passage of a law regulating computer work at home similar to
the law used against the New England knitters.  Of course, it is unclear 
what the extent of such a law would be, but it would definitely effect all 
those solitary hackers putting out nifty utilities for PC's as a profitable 
hobby.  In this case, hacker does = criminal; someone could be prosecuted
for programming at home just like the knitters in New England.

Both my father and mother are union members, and my father was once
local president of an AFL-CIO affiliate union, so I want to make it crystal
clear that I don't intend this to be an attack on the union movement.
What I am afraid of is that there might be enough looney senators and
representatives to pass a broader law covering more "work-at-home" categories
such as the computer industry or other industries which make use of computers.

Although such a law is unlikely, I've heard of two other changes to 
rules and regulations affecting working on computers at home.

I.

Quite a while ago, some of the local telephone companies were proposing
changes to the tariffs which would consider any line used for data
transmission (modems) a BUSINESS line and therefore subject to the
business rate schedule.  For most of us, this would result
in rather stiff rate increases.  After an initial flurry of messages on the
net about this, I haven't heard a thing.  Anyone following this?

II.

The other issue had to do with homeowner/renter insurance against theft.
Some insurers are now refusing to cover terminals or computers under
home insurance policies for similar reasons: they consider such things
to be BUSINESS equipment, and therefore one needs to take out a separate
business insurance policy.  Although this is not a widespread practice
(thank goodness), it may be only a matter of time before it becomes standard.

Joe Falcone
Eastern Research Laboratory		decwrl!
Digital Equipment Corporation		decvax!deccra!jrf
Hudson, Massachusetts			tardis!