From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!csd.unb.ca!morgan.ucs.mun.ca!nstn.ns.ca!news.cs.indiana.edu!att!linac!uchinews!rabi.uchicago.edu!trivedi Thu Apr 30 15:23:08 EDT 1992
Article 5304 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Xref: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca comp.ai.philosophy:5304 sci.logic:1242
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!csd.unb.ca!morgan.ucs.mun.ca!nstn.ns.ca!news.cs.indiana.edu!att!linac!uchinews!rabi.uchicago.edu!trivedi
>From: trivedi@rabi.uchicago.edu (Anil Trivedi)
Subject: Re: An apology to Mr. Krishnaprased
Message-ID: <1992Apr28.090935.21502@midway.uchicago.edu>
Sender: news@uchinews.uchicago.edu (News System)
Organization: Enrico Fermi Institute, University of Chicago
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1992 09:09:35 GMT


kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie) writes:

>trivedi@rabi.uchicago.edu (Anil Trivedi) writes:
>>                  ...who have considered suing [Zeleny] and Harvard for
>>attacks on them (posted from a Harvard address using Harvard's computer...

>Insults and verbal attacks are generally Constitutionally protected
>speech ...  unlikely to have any grounds for a lawsuit. 
>In addition,... Harvard is unlikely to be found liable.

I cannot second-guess what real life is or is not capable of producing. You
cite good examples later, but those supporting the opposite view no doubt
exist. Even you are careful to include the word "generally"! The whole legal
process (including appeals and what not) exists BECAUSE lawyers and judges can 
and do disagree among themselves.

BTW, I am NOT giving legal advice to anyone.
My point was that Mr Zeleny has been known to offend people. 


[On academic freedom etc.]:
>[Harvard] knows that freedom of expression is central to academic freedom
>and that student and staff, in their public expressions and demonstrations, 
>speak only for themselves.

Are you not tilting and exaggerating the truth just a little? :-)
Universities also know the need for *rules*, for they sure have lots
of them.
Academic freedom, like the freedom of the press, is largely a self-serving
myth (though a good one for my taste): legally, academics have no special 
freedoms that ordinary persons do not have.
Constitution prevents the GOVERNMENT from BANNING speech. It does NOT
unconditionally protect us from CONSEQUENCES: paying damages; going to
jail for revealing a secret; etc. It does NOT guarantee us free speech
on/from someone else's property, using their resources: be it a university,
department store, or a friend.
Universities, like ALL corporations, CAN be held indirectly responsible 
for all sorts of things. All corporations know this, and all, commercial
or educational, regulate the individual behavior accordingly.


****************************
BTW, all of above is only in the best/worst tradition of academic
discussion.
I personally do not think that Mr Zeleny, for all of his many faults,
should be denied ACCESS to the computers.
It may come as a shock to many, and I suspect I am about to become
wildly unpopular, but I am thinking about writing his advisor urging
his reinstatement.
That will be only a REQUEST, although a well-reasoned one.
I cannot tell an institution that they have no right to regulate
what happens on their grounds. Nor can I tell a professor that his
student's professional conduct is none of his business---far from it!
But I will make a good-faith request that he REINSTATE, MONITOR, and
try/struggle to EDUCATE Mr Zeleny.
****************************

-----


