hes@ecsvax.UUCP (05/26/84)
<> Without discussing the specifics of the "tim" case, does it make any difference what his status was? I have a not fully verbalized feeling that the relationship (responsibilities & rights -- in both directions) is not the same between employee-employer as between graduate student-faculty. I personally feel that there is a significant difference. I also wonder if there can be a justifiable contract in which a person willingly agrees to use a computer for a restricted set of purposes - even though the other things (e.g., postnews) are accessible and even though other (more or less) similar people are allowed to do the other things. We may not find out the details, but the generalities are of importance. --henry schaffer genetics ncsu
gam@proper.UUCP (Gordon Moffett) (05/28/84)
# I find the arguments about whether a "tim" has a right to use the net or whether that is a priviledge granted to a "tim" irrelevant for the most part. Simply because an act is legal does not make it right or just. UNC & Mr. Brooks may have been entirely within their rights and the law to restrict Mr. Maroney, but (from what I have seen) it was a silly game with a bunch of power-politics and high ego stakes envolved. To me, this transcends the `rights/priviledge' issue.