"The most Harvard can really do is make surethat there are sufficient Harvard rules to coverthe various computer crimes [and] misconduct thatcan hapen here on campus," Osterberg said.
"As it stands, Harvard rules don't covercomputer and network activity very well,"Osterberg added. "They're no better than the stateand federal governments on this ount."
Steen responded by defending the rules andsetting them out in simple terms.
"Computer piracy is illegal," he said. "It isillegal to copy and distribute software you do notown. We clearly do not allow illegal activities onour network. Illegal activities on our network areagainst the rules"
But Steen added that Harvard needed to revisitthe issue of computer piracy.
"I think we have to look at the whole issueagain in light of the court action," he said.
Gray Areas
Despite Steen's simple declaration thatcomputer piracy is illegal and illegal activitiesare against the rules, Kim and Stafford both saidthere were gray areas that needed to beconsidered.
"Harvard's rules do not cover acts of ommissionas much as they cover acts of commission, and in acase where the action is non-malicious, I don'tknow what the violation [is] because Harvard hasnot made that clear," Stafford said. "That is oneof the things they need to make clear."
Kim agreed that the issue of "premeditation andignorance" was a significant one.
The key question, he said, was whether someonewas intentionally trying to make softwareavailable so others could copy it for free, orwhether that person made the commercial softwareavailable unwittingly because he was too ignorantto prevent it.
It is this case that Harvard needs to thinkabout, Kim said.
"Does ignorance absolve one ofresponsibility?," he asked. "It's a commonquestion for criminal lawyers, but it's especiallyrelevant to technology related wrongdoings."
Kim outlined some examples of cases where astudent might fall with-in ambiguous territory ifHarvard does not carefully consider the gray areashe suggests.
Is a student responsible if he unwittinglymakes his computer accessible to the entire worldthrough the Internet and people copy software offhis hard drive, Kim asked?
Kim contends that Harvard's rules are notpresently equipped to deal with these problems.
According to Kim, Harvard rules say a studentis responsible if he forgets to log out andsomeone else comes along and does somethingmalicious or illegal, even though the student whoforgot to log out had nothing to do with theincident.
While Harvard's rules on piracy are ambiguous,the judge in LaMacchia's case struck a blow forclearly defined legislation to regulatecyberspace.