Letters to Editors

Online respect

Dear Editors,

Re: “Staying in line online” (Sept. 18, 2009)

The Human Rights Office read last Friday’s Journal article on the Queen’s Computer Code of Ethics with some concern.

The story suggested that online access to potentially offensive material such as porn sites was not only unmonitored, but unregulated by Queen’s. In fact, this is an issue the University takes quite seriously. The Computer Code of Ethics is explicit about computer user responsibilities when it comes to this type of material. Article 10 of the Computer Code of Ethics reads: “Users must not use University computing or network facilities to do anything that is a violation of the rights of others. For example, users should not use University facilities to display, distribute or otherwise make available obscene, vulgar or harassing messages or material.” Article 12 of the same Code reads: “Users must not use University computing and network resources for any activity that violates federal or provincial laws.”

Additionally, the display of sexually explicit material in public places—workspaces, classrooms, residence halls, etc.—may be viewed as breaches of the Senate Harassment/Discrimination Policy and Procedure as well as other departmental policies and guidelines. It’s also possible for harassment that involves the use of social networking sites to fall within the jurisdiction of Queen’s anti-harassment policies.

We strongly advise students and other community members to consult documents such as the Computer Code of Ethics in their entirety. Everyone should consider both the rights and responsibilities of others before making decisions that could result in complaints and loss of computer use privileges including possible deprivation of Internet service through the Queen’s network.

Stephanie Simpson

Human Rights Advisor

Queen’s University Human Rights Office

RIAA exclusive

Dear editors,

Re: “Staying in line online” (Sept. 18, 2009)

In your article, you inaccurately refer to the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) as an external regulatory body. The RIAA identifies itself as a “trade group that represents the U.S. recording industry.” Its goals are to “foster a business and legal climate that supports and promotes their members’ creative and financial vitality.” You’ll note that nowhere do they say they’re interested in giving citizens fair access and use of the cultural products that artists create, nor do they have any concern for creators that don’t belong to their club.

Copyright is a trade monopoly granted to creators by society as an incentive to create and share their works and not something they’re naturally entitled to. Its purpose is to maximize overall cultural production and dissemination, not profits for any individual or organization.

The current copyright duration—life of the creator for more than 50 years—goes beyond creating incentive and stifles further creativity and new entrants into the marketplace. This is the result of intense lobbying by the RIAA or the Canadian Recording Industry Association (CRIA) and other similar commercial bodies with a very definite bias that often conflicts with the interests of society as a whole. Presenting them as a regulatory body gives them far too much credit as an even-handed source of evidence. It’s the equivalent of asking a used car salesman if he’s giving you the best deal out there.

Copyright infringement needs to be proven in a court of law, not the e-mail inbox of an IT Services employee.

Paul Webster

Ph.D ’12

Homecoming hook-up

Dear Editors,

Flashback to Queen’s Homecoming 2003—many Queen’s students weren’t even high school students yet. This was before the weekend gathering had negative connotations and brought with it bad press on a national scale. It was a time almost all Queen’s students remained on campus for the weekend to practice the Oil Thigh, mingle with Alumni who were visiting Kingston and cheer our football team on to victory. It also happens to be the weekend the two of us met for the first time. Our paths crossed at a pancake kegger for out-of-town alumni. One of us was assigned to “X” people’s hands and the other was handing out plastic cups. We were both purple, having bathed in a kiddie pool moments before. Five years later—almost to the day—we’re getting married.

Homecoming was the first memory we made together and, incidentally, remains one of our best. As you can imagine, Homecoming weekends, both past and present, are of huge importance to us both. We ask that you, as current Queen’s students, try to bring Homecoming back to the kind of event it used to be—the kind of event we met at five years ago and the kind of event all Queen’s students and alumni can be proud to say they were a part of. Please keep any would-be homecoming weekend festivities away from the Aberdeen area—our future homecomings depend on it.

We sincerely hope our future five year wedding anniversary and ten year Homecoming will be like the one we met at in 2003. We are looking forward to it—please help us make it happen.

Ian MacLeod, Sci ’04

Krystal Kehoe, ArtSci ’04

Love thy neighbour

Dear Editors,

Nothing comes from nothing. No idea, attitude or act comes occurs without being influenced by prior experience or the environment that surrounds it. Walking down my street in the evenings, I’ve seen a pair of men bedding down for the night under a cement overhang. Perfectly welcome by the property owners, the friendly gentlemen have never caused a problem. In fact, they often clean the garbage and debris from the nearby area before bedding down.

About a week ago, after falling asleep in their sleeping bags on the hard concrete, a group of individuals emptied a carton of eggs over the sleeping men, their sleeping bags and the very few possessions they had. With limited options, and nowhere to properly wash their things, they did their best to clean themselves up and quietly go on with life.

The next night, in a nightmare-like déjà-vu, the two men woke up to a second barrage of eggs. With no more options than the night before, these two men were forced to throw out most of their valued and limited possessions. Not only that, these all-too-regular ambushes forced them to relocate from an area that was the closest thing they had to a home.

This isn’t an isolated incident. It happens every day and we all do it—each and every one of us. Most of us leave our eggs at home in the fridge, but after all, eggs can take different forms. Whether it’s crossing the street to avoid a man asking for change, making a snide comment, or even just having certain prejudices in the back of our minds, we all throw our eggs.

I don’t want to single out the perpetrators of this latest act of cruelty. I won’t even blame them for what they did because acts like these aren’t random. They’re products of misconceptions we have about the homeless, products of making assumptions about people we don’t know and products of a lack of interaction. After all, we’d be hard-pressed to find individuals in our society that we know less about than our homeless, yet we freely pass judgment on them more so than other persom we pass on the street. This goes both ways.

Let’s try to prevent this prejudice on both ends. Let’s forego assumptions, let’s identify these misconceptions, let’s interact. Join me for a free meal at Macdonald Park on Sunday, Sept. 27 from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m. for Kingston’s first Annual Poverty Awareness BBQ. If we want a happier, more inclusive community, let’s start working towards it. After all, nothing comes from nothing.

Jeff Kennedy, ArtSci ’09

All final editorial decisions are made by the Editor(s)-in-Chief and/or the Managing Editor. Authors should not be contacted, targeted, or harassed under any circumstances. If you have any grievances with this article, please direct your comments to journal_editors@ams.queensu.ca.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Skip to content