POLICY AND PLANNING. POLITIQUES ET PLANIFICATION

Please find attached a "thread" of articles which recently appeared on the "General"newsgroup of the National Capital FreeNet.

I originally read these messages on my home computer via a modem on a telephone linesupplied by Bell canada. These messages werelare available to be read by anyone who hasaccess to the National Capital FreeNet. Ibelieve parts of the messages may constitute "hatemessages" under section 13.(1) of the Canadltm Human RigJus Act.

The messages consist of original articles posted by fa ••• (, , and series of responses to,.Iq c''\_ ~m othex:FreeNet users as well as rebuttals froml.'Il"\ As far as I can tell,•• I~ C'\. 15 located m Ottawa.

Parts of the transcript sidelined with " > "or" > > " or "> > > tt indicate passages beingrepeated from previous messages.

f~t.\ Ipostings are typical examples of Holocaust denial. As such, it is my view thematerial is inherently anti-semitic. It is intended to foment hatred and contempt against theTewishvictims:of Nazi persecution and against aU ;r~r; wht.\ maintain that the Holocaust is anhistorical fact.

Iwould appreciate your opinion as to whether J.IC\(' ~ s messages meet the thresholdnecessary for them to be considered as "hate messages" in the meaning of section 13. (1) ofthe Canadian Human Rights Act.

7'1Harvey GoldbergDirectorPolicy and Planning OtJ0016

Article ~ last):~ewsgro~From:_ '2.SUbject:~Reply-To. I I 2Date: Sun Nov 13 14:51:15 1994

2 (idS .5 .s' I)·1_-.. bilIlt

Bill,

_ (famous Nazi-hunter) stated thr.x ~::;.~~--eW~.!elIno extermination camps on German soil" -Books and Bookmen

He says that the Gassing of Jews took place in Poland exclusivelyHe is vvidely respected as a Holocaust athority. There are campsin east Germany which are today being passed off as Death Campswhich even one of the leading authorities says is not true.Dachau is one of them, over 100,000 people a year visit thisplace and see Steve's "Rooms and rooms of shoes" and are fedabsolute lies.

The World War Two Almanac contains the records of food rationsfor Auschvvitz inmates. The rations are admittedly smaIl but thisraises the question 5 why were these people fed at all if they weregoing to be gassed anyway? Could Germany spaIe this food?The fact that prisoners were fed surely puts the claimedefficiency of the murder of ten million into question. If peoplewere being fed what was the reason?

Allied assesments of the nature of many of the "Death Camps"shows that they thought they were factories. Auschwitz islisted as a buna(rubber) manufacturing plant. Why?

In the official list of Holocaust victims all deaths of Jewsin the Nazi controlled areas are listed as "victim of Holocaust"Did no one die of old age, accidental death, cancer, heart attack,allied bombing or of the raging typhus epidemic?

How could the systematic execution of ten million people befrom the German and Jewish populace. No nation couldhowever deluded, could stand for this. How could this have beenkept secret? If it was not a secret then why is it always claimed that

O If C' l·...... 1 "1\J ' I..L. t

"the Jews went quietly to their deaths in gas chambers which theythought were showers?

Fred Leuchter, gas chamber design specialist (desgner of many chambersused in the U.S. and elsewhere today) visited Auschwitz and"statedthat it was an impossiblity that the "gas chambers" there could haveever been used for executions.

••• IT ( (t':~:.~.~"::''l·.r~setf!j' used to murder Jews) is availabletOtht:faS"~'\tuliUlgailL under many different names. It's usefulness "for killing people would be very limited and would make anefficient program of mass execution impossible. The Nazis hadmany other more suitable gasses which could have been used forthe purpose of mass executions. Zyklon-~ was found in large quantities

at most of the concentration camps and records of requistitionshow it was used"regularly not for murders but for fumigation.All of this is verifyable, most of it in your nearest library.

Anyone who demands of Fate a guaranty of success,automatically renounces all idea of a heroic deed.

OU0013

ArticltJII •••• 'is last):Newsgroups:. S. tFrom: Ii S2SI. 7T • , f)Subject: Re: JI lssaasEIReply-To: ,. 7S7 •• aIIJSnUICWII.Cii (3. 8Z=1Date: Sun Nov 13 18:55:44 1994

In a previous article," __. Ld _.. u.

>>•>>> • ,- II .•

(famous Nazi-hunter) stated that there werecamps on German soil"--Books and Bookmen

He probably did, as the borders of germany were totally in fluxduring the war.

> He says that the Gassing of Jews took place in Poland exclusively> He is widely respected as a Holocaust athority. There are camps> in east Germany which are today being passed off as Death Camps

which even one of the leading authorities says is not true.> Dachau is one of them, over 100,000 people a year visit this> place and see Steve's "Rooms and rooms of shoes" and are fed> absolute lies.

Parts of east germany were parts of poland too, if i am notmistaken. Germany swallowed up all sorts of lands.

> The World War Two-Almanac contains the records of food rations> for Auschwitz inmates. The rations are admittedly small but this> raises the question - why were these people fed at all if they were> going to be gassed anyway? Could Germany spare this food?

Slave labour. They could spare the food, as the gennan army didnot need to ration untilllater on in the war.

> The fact that prisoners were fed surely puts the claimed> efficiency of the murder of ten million into question. If people> were being fed what was the reason?

000010

> .Allied assesments of the nature of many of the "Death Camps"> shows that they thought they were factories. Auschwitz is> listed as a buna(rubber) manufacturing plant. Why?

> In the official list of Holocaust victims all deaths of 1ews> in the Nazi controlled areas are listed as "victim of Holocaust"> Did no one die of old age, accidental death, cancer, heart attack,> allied bombing or of the raging typhus epidemic?

If an 80 year old man dies in his sleep, that's death by old age.If he dies while being marched S miles with no shoes and no food, that ismurder.

> How could the systematic execution of teIi million people be> kept secret from the German and Jewish populace. No nation could> however deluded, could stand for this. How could this have been> kept secret? If it was not a secret then why is it always claimed that> the Jews went quietly to their deaths in gas chambers which they> thought were showers?

How could LSD experiments on asylum people be kept secret from theCanadian people? How could brian steal so much and not get caught? How cantop-level rcmp officers become informants for criminal orgaizations?

If the germans were anything like us, it would be easy to pullsomething over on them. Especially since we didn't have propagandaministers and intense censorship.

> Fred Leuchter, gas chamber design specialist (desgner of many chambers> used in the U.S. and elsewhere today) visited Auschwitz and stated> that it was an impossiblity that the "gas chambers" there could have> ever been used for executions.

> Zyklon-B (the gas supposedly used to murder Jews) is available> today as a fumagant under many different names. It's usefulness> for killing people would be very limited and would make an> efficient program of mass execution impossible. The Nazis had

more suitable gasses which could have been used for> the purpose of mass executions. Zyklon-B was found in large quantities> at most of the concentration camps and records of requistition> show it was used regularly not for murders but for fumigation.

· There was enough of the gas to fumigate BILUONS of people. Entirecontinentst literally t could have been fumigated with this crap. It is aweak gas, and dissapates quickly when it's exposed to air.

Why did they need so much of it?Why were the prisoners being fumigated and not the arriVing nazi

officers, who had spent time in combat conditions and most likely infested?Why didn't they order vast quantities of illegal, easily traceable

dangerous, and hard to get gases that could have done the job better? :)

"To do nothing is as fatal as to do evil, but it is more cowardly. Themost unpardonable of mortal sins is inertia." -Eliphas Levi"A chain of iron is easier to break than a chain of tlowers"-Eliphas Levi

Article '17•• 1_S1'5 is last):~ 2 7ewsgroups:".2-•.From: __ JIll 3&23S1 12 (12 !JIll")Subject: Re: nAls iJReply-To: ai433@Free~et.carletDn.CA (John Baglow)Date: Sun Nov 13 19:40:50 1994

> > ••• _~ gas cham~ design ~.ecialist (desgner of many chambers> > used in the U.S. and elsewhere today) visited Auschwitz and stated> > that it was an impossiblity that the "gas chambeis" there could have> > ever been used for executions.

This indicates the measure of Knight's "kn~wledge", even of Holocaustdenial. Leuchter has been thoroughly discredited, convicted of fraud forclaiming professional qualifications he doesn't have, is no more a "gaschamber design specialist" than Knight is. See alt.revisionism. Not eventhe Holocaust-deniers depend too much on Leuchter anymore.

> > Zyklon-B (the gas supposedly used to murder Jews) is available> > today as a fumagant under many different names. It's usefulness> > for killing people would be very limited and would make an .> > efficient program of mass execution impossible. The ~azis had> > many other more suitable gasses which could have been used for> > the purpose of mass executions. Zyklon-B was found in large quantities> > at most of the concentration camps and records of requistition:> > show it was used regularly not for murders but for fumigation.

Zyldon-B is HCN--eyanide gas, used today in execution gas chambers in theUS. If I had any, I would gladly test it on Knight-he shouldn't mindt

since it is only good for fumigation. Come to think of it, though, itmight get rid of one net.louse •••

"listen to the fool's reproach! it is akingly title!"

-William Blake

?

'~.'":~ eanadian Human.tt · ~gbts Commission.. Commission canadiennedes droits de 1apersonne

~well YaldenMichelle Falardeau-Ramsay

[10hn Hucker (via)

c.c. Bill Pentney

[Gerry SavardHarvey Goldberg

Exempted I '~"''::';:'')rodProteg(~s I Pre,lev",'tsUnder I En ""erlu de

It; 0) l~ccass to IXiormation Act

LOI sur I'a~{';.~sa I'information

Subject)bjet MEETING WITH NATIONAL CAPITAL FREENET: FEBRUARY 16. 1995

Gerry Savard, Harvey Goldberg and Alwyn Child met with representatives of the NationalCapital FreeNet (NCF) on February 16, 1995 to discuss how to deal with use of the NCF forthe posting of messages which may contravene section 13 of the CmuJdian Human RighrsAct.

The NCF was represented by . of the NCF and ofComputing and Communication Services at Carleton University, . , the NCFboard member responsible for dealing with complaints and several other members of theNCF Board. (All the NCF participants are volunteers). Carleton University was representedby . ,Academic Affairs.

As you may recall, Commission involvement in this issue began as a result of inquires madeby . • . who contacted the Quebec Regional office regardingpostings attributed to that he felt constituted -hate messages" in themeaning of section 13. The Quebec Regional office.~ttempted a quick resolution by askingthe NCF to intervene. The NCF did not respond to this initiative.

Subsequently, _ concerns were highlighted in the CBC Prime Timedocumentary on hate on the Internet. file was transferred to Headquartersfor handling by the PCU.

pending Commission consultations with theNCF on what they were willing to do to control use of their system for purposes contrary tosection 13.

The meeting with NCF officials was amicable and productive. Gerry Savard andHarvey Goldberg explained the Commission's concerns regarding the possible use of the 0.NCF and similar systems to post -hate messages". We noted that the standard for ~

00231

determining whether a message contravening section 13 had been established in the SupremeCourt decision in Taylor and provided them with a copy of the decision.

We noted that the NCF User Agreement (copy attached) prohibited the posting of "unlawfulinfonnation on the system" and that the NCF could use this provision to disconnect NCFmembers who were posting hate messages. The NCF representatives, subject to consultationwith their Board, agreed that this was a reasonable way to approach the issue.

The NCF is currently developing a policy on pennissable use of the NCF system. Theyappear willing to the take the Commission's concerns into consideration in developing thispolicy.

The following procedure for dealing with possible future inquiries/complaints to the .Commission was discussed:

1. When the Commission is made aware of an alleged breach of seCtion 13, themessages in question will be reviewed to detennine whether they appear toconstitute hate messages as determined by the Supreme Court in the Taylorcase.

2. If the messages in question are considered to constitute hate messages theCommission will notify the NCF that a complaint/inquiry has been receivedand request their assistance in dealing with the matter.

3. The NCF will then take the steps it deems appropriate to ensure that the sameor similar postings are not transmitted by means of the NCF system. Theactions taken by the NCF may include warning the member to discontinueposting offensive messages and suspending or terminating NCF membership.

4. If the NCF is unwilling or unable to control use of their system for purposescontrary to section 13, the Commission will accept a formal complaint andproceed with it in the usual manner.

The NCF noted several general concerns they wished to bring to the Commission'sattention:

Although changes to NCF policy and administrative procedures may help to curb the useof the NCF for purposes contrary to section 13, this will not prevent the originators ofthe messages from getting access to Internet through other access providers in Canada or !f-,~other countries. W

00232 .. .13

We acknowledged the limitations of the Commission's jurisdiction but explained that theCommission was required to act when alleged breaches of the CHRA are brought to ourattention.

The NCF officials questioned why we were asking them to control the use of the net bytheir members when it was in fact the individual members that were originating themessages. The NCF was acting as a common carrier.

We explained that in the case of a formal complaint the respondent would likely be theindividual member but that the NCF, as a "telecommunication undertaking" in themeaning of section 13, had an onus to cooperate with the Commission in dealing withcomplaints. '

The NCF officials stressed that it is not feasible for them to monitor and control allpostings transmitted on their system. They noted, however, that they already have acomplaints procedure through which members can officially notify the NCF of concernsregarding how the NCF is being used by members. They agreed that by using thisprocess they could look into potential contravention of section 13 that were brought totheir attention by users or via the Commission.

The NCF representatives reiterated the classic argument against x:estrictions on freedom ofexpression: the best defense against untruths are 'truths. They noted that the Internetprovides a unique opportunity for people to rebut hatemonger. Postings on the Internetcan be responded to immediately. This is quite different from traditional means ofcommunication such as printed materials where the recipient of hateful material maynever see the refutations of that material.

The NCF representatives noted, by way of example, the use of the Internet by Holocaustdeniers. Each posting by a Holocaust denier is almost immediately refuted or challenged.,Therefore, anyone reading these messages also has immediate access to the truth.

We explained that the Commission was required to follow the law and precedentsestablished by the courts. Unlike in the US, Canadian courts have made it clear thatthere are reasonable limits to freedom of expression. With regard to the CHRA, theSupreme Court found that section 13 was a reasonable limit on the Chaner right to freespeech.

00233{()

At the conclusion of the meeting, the NCF representatives undertook to consult with theirBoard of Directors on the matters discussed at the meeting.

Gerry Savard undertook to write to . outlining the undertakings theCommission is see1dng from the NCF. It was also agreed that the NCF and the Commissionwould meet periodically to discuss this matter.

For your information, attached is a newspaper article on this issue that appeared in theVancouver Sun on February 22, 1995. Donna Balkan is quoted in reference to theCommission's discussions with the NCF.

~f GeraId Savard

00234 I(

~·e·•Canadian HumanRights Commission

Commission canadiennedes droits de Ja personne

l Security Cl_Hie.lion • Cl ••• ific:.tiou de Neurite

J. Gerald S~vardDirector GeneralAnti-DiscriminationPrograms Branch

The attached letter from outlining theNational Capital Free Net's proposed process for dealing withcomplaints is attached for your information.I suggest that we discuss their proposal at our next meeting.

P. AlWYn ChildHarvey GoldbergEddie TaylorMichel PareDonna Balkan

~•• ",'I-~~_ ......---~t.-"""··- •.•.•- ....- •.•.-

00240 .I~

National CapitalFreeNetde la Capitale nationale

Mr. Gerald Savard,Canadian Human Rights CommissionTower A, Place de Ville,320 Queen St.Ottawa, ON KIA lEI

_9SooC/1N.tio'*~FreeNet

Caneton Univenity1125 Colonel By Dnve

Ottawa. ONCanada. K1S 586

Dear Mr. Savard:

The purpose of this letter is to outline a proposed process for dealing with complaintsbrought to the attention of the Canadian Human Rights Commission about theactions of members of the National Capital FreeNet.

As. you know, the NCF has a user agreement which members must adhere to. Wedo not take explicit action to ensure that members comply with the agreementacting instead on complaints brought to our attention. We feel this is both themost practical method of dealing with t.he occasional contraventions and the mostappropriate balance between managing the system responsibily and limiting theassumed liability which would accrue from a more interventionist approach.

We suggest the following steps:

When the CHRC receives a complaint about a NCF member's activity, the CHRCevaluates the complaint using its normal standards and procedures. If the complaiutappears valid, a CHRC staff member sends email to the NCF member detailing itsdetermination with a copy to "complain<9lfreenet.carleton.ca". The NCF will handlethe complaint following its normal procedures. These most often involve a warningabout behavour that contravenes the NCF user agreement; repeated contraventionsmay lead to suspension or removal of the member's system access privileges.

If the CHRC wishes to proceed beyond the warning stage, the NCF will cooperatesubject to the understanding that we have assured our members that the personaliniormation t.h~Y have pruvtcd U5 will-rema.in pri·•.~.

Yours ...8'Qcerely.

oa2~7

~ •Canedj. Human &tibta CommissiOllCommissioD em-diame del droits de Ja personDe

~~~ 1 1996

PACj1/30.01.96Daybook: PAC

JGSATS:~9S00419

National Capital FreenetCarleton University1125 Colonel By DriveOttawa, OntarioK1S SB6

You will recall that I wrote to you in October 1995 and provided some comments onyour user agreement.

Since thent we have had discussions with the Blue Sky Freenet of Manitoba and haveobtained a copy of their Membership policy. We find this policy to be a good onet and withtheir permission have attached a copy of the policy to this letter. We think that you will findit useful. .

In the meantimet we wish you luck in your annual conference and look forward to yourresponse.

d SavardDirector GeneralAnti-Discrimination Programs Branch

002H I Y310Ql-.su..1W Floor ••••• "VIDe, Toww "A-, OIIaWl, OIIIIrio, KIA lEI320, rue QuMa. 22lI _,., Plau • Villi. Tour •A·. 0IIa•• (0aIari0) KIA lEI

~ Canadian Human Rights CommissionCommission canadienne des droits de la personne•

OCT 2 0 1995

National capital FreeNetCarleton University1125 Colonel By Driveottawa, ontarioK1S 5B6

~~empt.ed I SeveredUn~teges I Pre/eves

er I En vertu de

/91, )ACcess t' , f ;

Loi Sur I'aco'e~<irm,.. ation Act'" C1 Information

Thank you for your letter of August 10, 1995 in which youpropose certain steps to deal with complaints that arise from useractivity on the National capital FreeNet.

First, I would like to apologize for the delay in respondingto your letter. We have reviewed your proposal and find that it isa very useful first step. We believe that your policy/useragreement should be one that prohibi ts the use of the Nationalcapital Freenet to communicate hatred or contempt against anyonebecause of that person's race, ethnic origin, colour etc. Thiswould not only send the correct message, but also limit yourliability. A statement to the effect that the National capitalFreeNet is governed by Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Actwould be a useful statement of your obligation under the Law. Thissection covers the use of telephone facilities to exposeindividuals to hatred and contempt and was declared constitutionalby the Supreme Court of canada in ·'Taylor v. CHRC [1990] 3 S.C.R.892tr• The case also provides the ultimate judicial interpretationof the words trexpose", hatred and "contempt".

We have also looked at your suggestion that we communicate our"determinationlt to you using the e-11'.ail.This process will notmeet our notice and privacy requirements. It will be necessary forus to discuss this further.

I look forward. to receiving your response and to our furtherdiscussions on this matter.

~ Q.• aId Savard ~Di=ector GeneralAnti-Discrimination

D02~8

320 Queen Street. :2nd Floor. P1.ee de ViUe. Tower "A", Ona••.•• Ontario. KIA 1£1~"f\ ",~ ()\Iun :'.1e eLllPe. Pl.ce dc Ville. Tour ·Ao. Oluwa (Ontario) KIA lEI

~~~MomreaJ., October 1 -::" ,".;=-~

The National Capital FreenetOttawa. Ontario Exempted I Severed

Proteges I PrelevesUnder I En vertu de

Access 1,&(dJma.iOM ActLoi sur I'a~.s a l'~nformation

FollowiDg this morning conversation, I am scndiDg you copies ofmessages as wcU as copies of our last annual report aDd seeticms of our AJ:,t that deal withhate propaganda." .. "?

Contrary to first opbuon your received. in ~ that the "Canadian""""""~~ Riihts Co d have' . . . ~~edium because of the.,"'.";:."usc' of telephone lines communicate. As well, the fact that your Board of Admjnl~'S .

in admini.steri:ng your fIeenet requires 'that pote1'WaJ USCISsigned an apccmcnt totheir Itgood behavior- is certainly a good tool to comrol this kiDd of propag3Ilda. guesswe will have to find a similar device with tha commercial nets.

I understand that you will present to the Board this clocumentation in order for youto decide the appropriate measures, .

. ..In the meantime, I will be consulting with the Head office in ordet to see what we

can do to provide you guidance on standards to apply and the respect of freedom of speech.

Thank you very much.

~~Diane FecteauActing Regional Director

~(t ~!l. t't> i\.U.O 1\..\",~...ov · c.A. c.)~ ","0--\

~ eo- J.... c)

DFllb

....-...."":~..:"' ,.. "...","._ Encl.

0~J;?1~1~~~~~ti~t~~£~:;:t

(0• Canadian Human,. • Ri~hts Ccmmission

•Commission canadiennedes droits de 1&personne

r-Jo Gerald Savard, Alwyn Child,Eddie Taylor, Harvey Goldberg

Lr-Donna Balkan G:.:><1~

Chief l-T/External Relations

L.)U~,,:ec:t)bjet Hate on the Internet: Blue Sky Freenet policy

I had the opportunity earlier this week to meet with ., who is. of the BlueSky Freenet in Winnipeg and a current member of Blue

Sky's complaints committee. They havebeendealing with the issue of hate messageson the 'net (as well as other objectionable material) and I thought you might beinterested in their experience.

Like National Capital Freenet, BlueSky has a "Membership Policy" that givesthe administrators of the system the right to revoke Freenet membership for"unacceptable conduct" (which, according to . , would include ethnic/racialattacks or hate propaganda). Blue Sky has set up a five-member ComplaintsCommittee whose job it is to consider such ·complaints. If the committee decides thecomplaint is warranted, it will cut off the member's access for a period of 21 days (ona first offence). If a second offense occurs, the suspension will be for six months andthe committee can recommend to the board of directors that Freenet membership bepermanently revoked.

To date, Blue Sky has had one case specifically involVing hate messages.Inthis case, several members complained about postings which were virulently anti-Semitic and anti-Chinese. Thecommittee upheldthe complaints, and the offender wassuspended for 21 days. There were no further offenses.

Minutes of a Blue Sky complaints committee meeting show that "Ethnic orRacial attacks" are second only to "exposing the Blue Sky system to serious andimmediate threat or legal liability" in terms of the committee's list of priorities forimmediate action (personal attacks and obscene languagearethird and fourth on thelist). The Blue Sky board has taken the position that "unless we police the systemourselves, government will step in to do it for us" and, as a result, takes complaintsof racist messages very seriously. According to . . ' the Blue Sky committeewould be receptive to dealing with any complaints we may receive about hatemessages on Blue Sky Freenet. /7I have anached for your information a copy of Blue Sky's membership andacceptable use policies, as well as its policy for dealing with complaints.

BLUE SKY FREE-NET OF MANITOBA INC.MEMBERSHIP POLICY

Blue Sky Free~Net of Manitoba Inc. (hereafter called Free-Net) is acommunity-based computer network designed to give free access to electronicinformation services to the population of Manitoba.

1. The use of the Free-Net is a privilege which may be revoked by theadministrators of the system at any time for unacceptable conduct. Suchconduct would include. but not be limited to. the plaCing of unlawfulinformation on the svstem of obsc ive or otherwiseo jecUona e anguage jn either public or. upon registration of comp ain .private messages.

2. Free-Net reserves the right to reViewany material stored in files to which allusers have access and will edit or remove any material which the Free-Net. inits sole discretion. believes may be unlawful, obscene. abusive or otherwiseobjectionable.

3. All information services and features carried on the Free-Net are intended forthe pI1vate use of its patrons. and any commercial or unauthorized use ofthose materials,in any form. is expressly forbidden; it is placed there forgeneral infomational purposes and is in no way intended to refer to. or beapplicable to, any specific person, case or situation.

4. Free-Net does NOT warrant that the functions of this system will meet anyspecific requirements nor that it will be error-free or uninterrupted; nor shallit be liable for any indirect. incidental or consequential damages (includinglost data, information or profits) sustained or incurred in connectiOn with theuse, operation or inability to use the Free-Net.

5,. All members must abide by such rules and regulations of system usage asmay be announced from time to time by the administrators of the Free-Net.

6. The administrators of Free-Net will be the sole arbiter of what constitutesobscene. abu sive. or objectionable conduct or material.

7. All members who are of the minimum age of 16 and who reside in Manitobahave full voting rights. By law. all directors of Free-Net must be a min1mum of18years of age.

8. In consideration for the pI1v1legeof uSing the Free-Net and in considerationfor haVing access to the information contained on it. by application formembership. all members release the Free-Net, its officers and directors,operators. and any firms or institutions with which they are affiliated. fromany and all claims of any nature ariSing from their usage of the Free-Net.Further. Free-Net assumes no responsibility for any long distance chargeswhich may be incurred by its members.

0043{ 13

APPENDIX 1.:Blue Sky Community Networks of Manitoba Inc.

Policy on Complaints Against Members

I . Principles

1.1 Blue Sky Community Networks (BSCN) is committed to thepromotion of freedom of expression. It is open to persons of allpolitical and religious views and respects the right of persons toexpress their Viewseven where other members may find those Viewsor their expression offensive.

1.2 The right of members to use the BSCN system (the System) issubject to the Acceptable Use Policy and the Membership Policy andto the laws of Manitoba and Canada.

1.3 Members are entitled to notice and a hearing before theirright to use the system is restricted or terminated unless it isnecessary to take immediate action to avert a serious threat to thein terests of BSCN.

1.4 Complaints about the conduct ora member should be resolvedthrough mediation and discussion whenever possible.

2. Defmit10ns

2.1 In thiS policy:a. "system administrator" means any person who monitors the

"root" and "postmaster" mailboxes and any other person towhom the board or a committee has assigned the responsi-bility of receiving complaints.

b. "system operator" means a person designated by thetechnical operations committee with the ability to removeor alter messages or user accounts.

c. "notice" shall be given according to the procedures setout in By-Law No,.1.

3. The Complaints Committee

3. 1 The Board of Directors shall establish a Complaints Committeewhich shall consist of 5 members, including a chair. All members ofthe Complaints Committee shall be members in good standing of BSCNbut need not be members of the board.

3.2 The complaints conunittee shall, to the extent possible,conduct its deliberations by electronic mail. It may conduct itsproceedings in an informal manner. It is not reqUired to followrules of eVidence, conduct oral hearings or allow members to callor cross examine Witnesses.

0043~

3.3 Subject to Article 4.4 of this Policy. any decision by thecomplaints conun1ttee to take action against a member of BSCNrequires the concurrence of at least three members of the commit-tee.

3.4 The complaints com.m1tteeshall maintain an archive file ofelectronic mail messages it sends and receives in respect of eachcomplaint.

3.5 At least once every six months the complaints committee shallsubmit a report to the board and the members in which it shallsummarize the complaints it has received and how they are disposedof.

4. Procedure for Handling Complaints

4.1 If a complaint is received which has not also be forwarded tothe subject of the complaint (the respondent). the complaintscommittee shall ask the complainants permission to forward a copyof the complaint to the respondent. The complaints COmmltteemayrefuse to disclose the identity of the complainant to the respon-dent if it has reason to believe that the respondent might sufferrepercussions if his or her indentity were disclosed.

4.2 Where the complaint has been forward to the respondent. thesystem administrator or other person who receives the complaintshall forward the standard response message (See Part 2) and notifythe Complaints Committee.

4.3 The Complaints Committee may at any stage of this process.reject a complaint which. in the opinion of three members of thecommittee. has no merit or is too trivial to require action.

4.4 Upon receiving notice of a complaint. the complaints chair orany two members of the complaints committee may do any of thefollowing:

a. refer the matter to the Complaints Committee for reviewand recommendations;

b. if the message or me may expose BSCN to legalliabll-ity. request a system operator to block public access tothe message or me immediately;

c. where it appears that the conduct of the respondent posesa serious and immediate risk to BSCN. and where at 'leaston table officer agrees. request a system operator todisable the respondent's ability to send electronic mallor post news for a period not exceeding 21 days.

4.5 As soon as possible after receiving a complaint. the Complaint

0043£

Committee shall forward a copy of the complaint to the respondentand request a response. The committee may set a reasonable time inwhich a respondent must reply. Where the respondent's e-ma:il accesshas been suspended, the Complaints Committee shall notify therespondent by ordinal)' mail and give the respondent an opportunityto reply either by ordinary mail,in person or by telephone. TheComplaints committee shall then forward a copy of the respondent'sreply to the complainant.

4.6 The Complaints Committee may, at any stage of the complaints,process request that a member of the committee or some other personact as a mediator between the parties to the complaint.

4.7 The complaints committee will investigate the complaint and ifit finds the complaint to be justified it may:

a. issue a private reprimand to the respondent:b. issue a public reprimand to the respondent;c. suspend the respondent's e-mail access for a period of up

to six months;d. recommend to the board that the respondent's membership

in BSCN be terminated.1) issue a reprimand. 2) suspend your access privileges for up to

six months or, 3) recommend to the board that your membership becancelled. "

4.8 The complaints committee shall notify the complainant and therespondent of its decision.

4.9 Either the complainant or the respondent may appeal from adecision of the Complaints Committee to the Board by giving noticeto the SecretaI)' Within 14 days after receiving notice of thedecision of the Complaints Committee.

4.10 Where an appeal is flIed the Complaints Committee shallprovide to the board copies of all electronic mail message it sentor received relating to the complaint. The Complainant and therespondent shall also be entitled to submit further material byelectronic mail or ordinal)' mall. Neither the Complainant nor therespondent shall be entitled to make an oral submission to theboard Without the permission of the board.

4.11 Where the recommendation of the complaints committee is toterminate the membership of the respondent. the procedures inArticle 3.7 of By-Law No. 1 shall govern the proceedings before theBoard.

::<1

5.1 Any member of the technical operations committee. who has beenassigned responsibility for some aspect of system security. whobecomes aware of conduct which is threatening the security of theBSCN system may take such steps as may be necessary to protect thesecurity of the system including immediately and Without noticedisabling the offending member's access to the system. TheTechnical Operations Committee shall then noti{y the ComplaintsCommittee who shall notify the member and conduct a hearing todetermine what, if any. further action should be taken against amember.

Blue Sky FreeNet of Manitoba Inc.Acceptable Use Policy

It is the intent of the Blue Sky FreeNet of Manitoba Inc. toprovide free. open and equitable access to the users of thesystem. The Blue Sky FreeNet does not attempt to articulate ALLreqUired or prohibited behavi'our by its users. Therefore. eachindividual's judgement of appropriate conduct must be relied upon.To assist in such judgement. the follOwingpolicy has beendeveloped along with a By-law which has been approved by themembership. Users of the Blue Sky FreeNet of Manitoba Inc. arebound by the By-law and Policies as stated. Failure to comply mayresult in suspension or revocation of their privilege of use. Forthe purposes of the policies Blue Sky FreeNet of Manitoba Inc. maybe used interchangeably wit "Blue Sky." "FreeNet." "Blue SkyFreeNet," or "system."

1. The Blue Sky FreeNet does not vet e-mail or informationin advance of it being put on the system.

2. Users may be restricted by the system administratorsbased on the finite capacity of the system as to the amount ofdisk storage they are able to occupy and time spent connected tothe system.

3. The Blue Sky FreeNet assumes no liability for data. Thereis no guarantee of the security of the information. It Is notreconunended that users conduct financial transactions uSing thesystem.

4. Information shall be provided in a non-intrusive manner.

5. Users shall have the opportunityfor feedback to allinformation providers on the system.

6. Unsolicited e-mail Is not acceptable (i.e. junk mailand/ or solicitations).

7. Direct paid advertiSing or information containing productpricing or catalogue listings are not acceptable uses. Corporatesponsorship and recognition are acceptable. Non-profitorganizations may prOvide information as to membership fees.publications. and entrance fees.

8. Any use of the FreeNet for unlawful purposes isprohibited. 2]

9. Where the Blue Sky FreeNet has no specific policy. theFreeNet and its users shall conform to the community standards ofmorality.

10. In accordance with the Canadian Copyright Act. copying ofany data or information from the FreeNet (other than that which isdirected to a specific person or group of persons, i.e. e~mail,conferences), without pennission of the oliginator Is prohibited.The prOvider may indicate this permission within its information.

11. Use of Blue Sky to gain unauthorized access to theFreeNet system or to gain unauthorized access to other systems isprohibited.

12. Blue Sky FreeNet information services and features areintended solely for the use of Blue Sky FreeNet users and anycommercial or unauthorized use of this information in any fonn isforbidden. The FreeNet Board of Directors reselVes theunconditional right to remove services, features, users orproviders pending arbitration.

13. Where users of the Blue Sky FreeNet of Manitoba havequestions or complaints relating to the Acceptable Use Pollcy, theBlue Sky FreeNet of Manitoba shall prOvide a means for arbItration.

a. There shall be a designated system adminIstrator whoshall receive complaints of violations of the acceptable usepolicy.

b. The system administrator shall review the offendinginformation and may immediately remove information from the systemif, in the opinion of the system adminstrator, it may expose thefree~net to legalliabllity.

c. The system administrator shall report all complaintsto the information content committee for a decision. Theinformation content committee may deSignate a subcommittee for thepurpose of healing and deCiding a complaint.

d. Any interested person shall have the right to appealto the board of cUrectors.OCT 11/94

Q L/0044C ~ {