Slashdot Log In
Copyright Lobbies Threaten Federal College Funding
Posted by
Zonk
on Sun Jan 20, 2008 08:30 PM
from the i-went-to-school-in-a-very-different-time dept.
from the i-went-to-school-in-a-very-different-time dept.
plasmacutter writes "The EFF is raising the alarm regarding provisions injected into a bill to renew federal funding for universities. These new provisions call for institutions of higher learning to filter their internet connections and twist student's arms over 'approved' digital media distribution services. 'Under said provision: Each eligible institution participating in any program under this title shall to the extent practicable — (2) develop a plan for offering alternatives to illegal downloading or peer-to-peer distribution of intellectual property as well as a plan to explore technology-based deterrents to prevent such illegal activity. Similar provisions in last year's bill did not survive committee, it appears however that this bill is headed toward the full house for vote.' Responding to recriminations over this threat to university funding, an MPAA representative claims federal funds should be at risk when copyright infringement happens on campus networks." We've previously discussed this topic, as well as similar issues.
Related Stories
[+]
RIAA College Litigations Getting A Bumpy Ride 270 comments
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "The RIAA's juggernaut against colleges, started in February of this year, seems to be having a bumpier and bumpier ride. The normal game is to call for a subpoena, to get the name and address of the students or staff who might have used a certain IP address. The normal game seems to be getting disrupted here and there. A Virginia judge threw the RIAA's motion out the window, saying that it was not entitled to such discovery, in a case against students at the College of William & Mary. A New Mexico judge denied the application on the ground that there was no reason for it to be so secretive, in a case involving University of New Mexico students. He ultimately required the RIAA to serve a full set of all of the underlying papers, for each 'John Doe' named, and to give the students 40 days in which to review the papers with counsel, and make a motion to quash if they chose to do so. In a stunning development, the Attorney General of the State of Oregon made a motion to quash the RIAA's subpoena on behalf of the University of Oregon, on grounds which are fully applicable to every case the RIAA has brought to date: the lack of scientific validity to the RIAA's "identification" evidence. The motion is pending as of this writing. Students have themselves made motions to vacate the RIAA's ex parte orders and/or quash subpoenas in over half a dozen cases. Much combat remains, but the RIAA's campaign is no longer a hot knife cutting through butter on the nation's campuses."
[+]
Politics: Anti-P2P College Bill Moving Through House 334 comments
An anonymous reader writes "A news.com article is covering an amendment to the College Opportunity and Affordability Act (pdf) that should make folks in Hollywood, the RIAA, and the MPAA well pleased. The tiny section seeks to hinge government approval of an institution of higher learning on whether or not they adequately dissuade Peer-to-Peer filesharing of copyrighted materials. The Act came out of the House Education and Labor Committee, which agreed on the terms unanimously. There is still some question, though, as to what penalties should be handed down for institutions that don't do enough to protect intellectual property. 'Some university representatives and fair-use advocates worry that schools run the risk of losing aid for their students if they fail to come up with the required plans. "The language in the bill appears to be clear that failure to carry out the mandates would make an institution ineligible for participation in at least some part of Title IV (which deals with federal financial aid programs)," Steven Worona, director of policy and networking programs for the group Educause, said in a telephone interview Thursday.'" Update: 11/16 16:36 GMT by Z : PDF link corrected.
[+]
Ask Slashdot: Keeping Up With IT Developments In Education? 32 comments
antgiant writes "I work for a college in the IT department, and I've been having a hard time finding quality resources that cover IT topics with relationship to education. So I ask you: outside of Slashdot, what listservs, newsgroups, fourms, etc. should I be participating in? In particular, I am interested in resources that tend to cover more legal topics such as the now-approved anti-peer-to-peer law."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
{sigh} (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:{sigh} (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
We could vote 'em out of office, but that didn't work too well either last year. The new ones quickly became just as evil and corrupt as the old ones.
Sigh.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
That's because we didn't vote the corrupt ones out of office, we voted already corrupt ones in to office. What should have happened is that we should have talked to our party chairperson (on whatever party that we wanted someone out of) and explained that they had 2 choices- make that guy not run for re-election and we'd stick with that party or let that
Re:{sigh} (Score:4, Interesting)
Parent
Re:{sigh} (Score:5, Interesting)
The real solution is to vote for third parties.. What really scares mainstream politicians is losing votes to someone who isn't well known, because that means that people are beginning to notice that the mainstream parties are two sides of the same coin and rejecting that coin.
Of course, before every election you will hear how you should vote for one of the big candidates, because other votes don't matter. In actuality it is the opposite. Votes for big candidates don't matter since they are all votes for the same coin. They simply reinforce the opinions that the current politicians in power have.
There are of course times when voting for the lesser of two evils has its purpose, but it is far less often than most people would think. To avoid this completly it would of course be better to have a system where you could rank your candidates, but try getting that into the law.
Parent
Re:{sigh} (Score:5, Interesting)
It doesn't matter what kind of laws they write—if we stop buying their stuff, they will eventually go out of business, fascist laws and draconian enforcements notwithstanding.
Ever since I found out more about the copyright industry vs. the public struggle, I made sure I spent absolutely nothing on what's produced by MPAA and RIAA members—no music sold through a major record label, and no movies (I used to go to theater once every month or so—not anymore). Of course, one man not handing money over to MPAA and RIAA may not make a difference, but if you and I stop making them a profit and tell everyone we know not to, one day we just might.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No, everyone stops buying their stuff and they'll just use it to prove that piracy is that bad and they should get paid by the government.
While that is true to some extent (such as the media tax on blank CDs in Canada), at some point, they are going to run into a wall—another business cartel/union as large and powerful as themselves. Right now, they are fighting against individual (suspected) copyright violators and occasional universities that refuse to bend over to their demand. When they tick off a larger industry, such as ISPs, with some unreasonable demand of profit-sharing, they will have a real fight then, and, eventually, after
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Umm, we don't have to buy them, we already pay for them. We just have to act like it. Money does not keep them in office we do.
A group of voters from their district in any significant number scares the sh!t out of most Congressmen. Especially when they have petitions, signs and a few soccer moms.
At some point, we're going to have to shoot them.. (Score:5, Interesting)
Show me the candidate that wants to ban credit cards, reduce the terms of patents, or do any structural thing designed to break up the current moneyed class. There isn't one. There's no political party seeking to benefit the American people, merely, a set of dueling soulless juggernaughts, jousting, half drunk with power, over whose lords will crush the masses the most.
Parent
Re:At some point, we're going to have to shoot the (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Do you know anything about McCarthyism? He basically labeled anyone who opposed his beliefs a communist. If you read the parent's post carefully, you'd see that he actually speaks for productivity, trade, and competition - hardly communist ideals.
Re:At some point, we're going to have to shoot the (Score:4, Insightful)
Despite what some people would have you believe, there's more to the world that just black and white partisan politics; there are middle grounds. You can have a mixed system to promote the general well being and the common good without becoming ruthless or authoritarian, which, coincidentally, is what can happen to capitalist societies if left alone. A good example is the political corruption of the late nineteenth century and early twentieth century. It wasn't the free market that fixed those problems, is was (the now called) socialist policies, and without those policies, life would generally suck.
Communism doesn't work (at least, it hasn't in the past), but plutocracy ain't too hot either. Think of economic policies like salt. Salt is made up of an explosive metal and a poisonous gas, but without salt, you die. Pure communism and capitalism are very bad things; we need a mixture, and sometimes the mixture needs to be adjusted. If it wasn't for having a mixture, we'd both probably be working in sweatshops right now.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
One would think that
Re:{sigh} (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:{sigh} (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:{sigh} (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
"Develop a plan" (Score:4, Interesting)
Parent
Re:"Develop a plan" (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re:"Develop a plan" (Score:4, Interesting)
Parent
These 4-Letter Trade Groups... (Score:5, Funny)
They need to learn another 4-letter term: RICO.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Industry associations declare war on youth - again (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Not true.
If no one is buying their product, they will claim that it is due to the illegal copying of their product - proving that they need more stringent laws.
Ad infinitum.
It's a priority call (Score:4, Insightful)
We're on the road!
Re:It's a priority call (Score:4, Insightful)
Who cares? The next generation won't need a college education unless they want to move to a technology leader country such as Japan or China. The US will simply move down the ladder to 3rd world status. When the out of work Americans can't afford iPods and high speed internet anymore, the problem will go away.
(end rant)
It is important to have universities teach. This attack on education (it isn't support in any way) is outside the scope of what a university is all about. I hope this doesn't get traction and stuff that helps higher learning instead of attacking it gets traction.
Parent
Old News (Score:3, Informative)
Segment of the article (Score:5, Informative)
(a) In General- Each eligible institution participating in any program under this title shall to the extent practicable--
(1) make publicly available to their students and employees, the policies and procedures related to the illegal downloading and distribution of copyrighted materials required to be disclosed under section 485(a)(1)(P); and
(2) develop a plan for offering alternatives to illegal downloading or peer-to-peer distribution of intellectual property as well as a plan to explore technology-based deterrents to prevent such illegal activity.
Re:Segment of the article (Score:5, Insightful)
(a) In General- Each eligible institution participating in any program under this title shall to the extent practicable--
1) make publicly available to their students and employees, the policies and procedures related to the illegal downloading and distribution of copyrighted materials required to be disclosed under section 485(a)(1)(P); and
(2) develop a plan for offering alternatives to illegal downloading or peer-to-peer distribution of intellectual property as well as a plan to explore technology-based deterrents to prevent such illegal activity.
Ok, what do you mean it doesn't look dire?
Number 1 is already borderline in my books, number 2 is right over the top.
Number 2 says the university must both actively promote some sort of legal alternative, while simultaneously seek technology to filter illegal activity. In order to qualify for federal funding.
Don't let the 'develop a plan' phrasing lull you. They want a strategy, with a timeframe, and deadline for implementation. You aren't getting off the hook with: "My plan for curbing torrents: 'put a port block on XXX'. To be implemented by the year 2058. The end."
There is no simply justification for federal funding to hinge on pandering to an industry lobby group. Not ever.
What's next? MADD gets to ram through some legislation where the university will have to develop a plan to prevent drinking and driving, including instituting technological measures to prevent it [just imagine what that would look like!], if they want federal funding.
And then the religious right wingnuts get theirs... the university has to develop a plan to ensure illegal sexual behaviour* is technologically prevented...
(*in some states anal and oral sex are illegal, but hey this could be expanded to cover anything remotely indecent or other riske mischief that students are particularly famous for...)
Bottom line, the university is not responsible for policing students. The police are. This is pure and utter bullshit. I sure hope there is some way of challenging the legality of this law itself.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
the illegal downloading and distribution of copyrighted materials
to illegal downloading or peer-to-peer distribution of intellectual property
1. which is it, copyrighted materials or intellectual property? Are they trying to suggest the two are synonymous?
2. what illegal downloading are they talking about? Can they state which laws exactly make downloading illegal? Cause if they're talking about the No Electronic Theft act, sorry, that's not relevant to downloading.
3. haha, your stupid country has laws that deal with civil matters with criminal laws.. how fucked are you?
We are all criminals in their eyes! (Score:5, Interesting)
In the eyes of the federal government, we are all terrorists, so our Constitutional rights should be taken away.
In the eyes of Comcast and Verizon, we all use our Internet connections that we pay for to do illegal stuff, so we should have our Internet connections regulated, censored, and spied on.
In the eyes of the MPAA and RIAA, we are all illegal software pirates that deserve to be sued for millions of dollars.
And in the eyes of collages and universities across the United States, we are all criminals who are plotting school shootings and bombings, and deserve to have the FBI raid our dorms, be arrested, and be kicked out of collage.
See the picture here? Everyone thinks that if they label every single person on Earth as a criminal, it will make all our problems go away. But they are wrong. They are all wrong.
The federal government thinks they are keeping us safe by treating every single American as a terrorist plotting to blow up the country, but what about the people who actually are plotting something like that? They would never catch them because they would be too bush prosecuting innocent people to notice!
With airports locked down tightly thesse days, travelers are annoyed by all the security checks and security stuff to make sure people don't have weapons. But the people who actually want to do harm could probably easily smuggle that kind of stuff by them.
And for all the piracy bullshit, they think that shoving the DMCA and RIAA lawyers in everyone's faces will stop the 1% of people who ACTUALLY steal software, movies, and music, while the other 99% of us suffer. But it WON'T! Hell, I'm getting very tempted to start illegally putting brand new movies on BitTorrent just to stick it to the RIAA, MPAA, etc. If we're all criminals in these people's eyes, what would it matter? Personally I don't agree with downloading movies and music (with music sucking with that rap crap, what is there to download?), but I don't think it should be a federal crime punishable with million dollar fines and stuff.
When will they learn, the government and RIAA can't solve all their problems like this!
The Amish Method. (Score:5, Funny)
1) Buy everyone in the school music accounts to download music thus rasing the tutition, Which enrages students and punishes students who prefer going to buy their music at music stores, and will ultimetly result in retention levels dropping in an already competitive market as it is.
Or
2) The Amish Method. Cut the internet cable since there's nothing on the market that can assure 100% piracy free internet, ban all computers since they can make MP3's using a line in jack and a CD player, and ultimely ban electric power from everywhere on campus, since they could possibly use electricy to copy a tape with a boombox or operate an electric guitar.
At least the english, math and history professors would be happy with #2, since calculators would be banned and people would have to be forced to write their thesis's on parchment. Of course, Victrolas would have to be banned too, but it's hard finding a wind up one these days. Maybe they'll come back in vogue.
I agree with this... (Score:3, Interesting)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opposition_to_the_Vietnam_War [wikipedia.org]
The Universities Answer; (Score:5, Funny)
Since When Is This Our Problem? (Score:5, Insightful)
Copyright violations is a problem that affects a group of companies and an industry. Why should we be forced to collectively pay for their outdated business model/practices? How does this benefit the rest of us? If you don't think we'll end up paying for this, imagine what happens when universities don't get their Federal funding and our students don't get their education. Higher education is an absolute necessity for a productive country.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
That's not true. We don't need total surveillance to monitor You can selectively monitor piracy hotspots, like P2P networks, or illegal websites (think a US version of allofmp3.com, or something akin to that). If people want privacy, it would encourage them to find a network that successfully discourages piracy, or just to stop using the P2
Proper Outlets (Score:5, Insightful)
no illegal activity (Score:5, Insightful)
For instance, no one under 21 is supposed to drink. Most students at colleges are under 21, so clearly colleges should do more to make sure that alcohol is not available to the majority of the students.
I would also certainly think the software distributors would want the same protections, and representatives like the BSA has a zero tolerance policy. If one piece of pirated software is found on one computer on the campus, revoke all the funding.
i also know from pretty good sources that our college campuses are swarming with stolen calculators. Underage kids steal them, and then sell to college kids for half price. It is hard to prosecute the college kids for receiving stolen property, btu easy enough to revoke funding if the school does not put into place a program to teach the kids that stealing is wrong. Because, obviously, the problem is not that the temptation of cheap calcultors, but that they students were never taught right from wrong.
Not a bad idea?" (Score:4, Interesting)
Here is the beginnings of one such plan...
2.a. When it comes to music, music that does not have a Free License is not allowed on the campus networks. Net even legally purchased music if it doesn't have a Free License.
2.b. The University has set up a server at freemusic.university.edu where we host music with licenses as described in 2.a.
all the best,
drew
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
2.a A single, purchased copy (at educational discount prices) of all copyrighted works (music and movies) shall be placed in the university library. Additional federal funding will be required to purchase these works, however such funds could be covered by an additional tax on the record labels.
2.b Students will have 24hr online streaming access to the university library, so long as they play/view one work at a time.
After all, turnabout is
Special Place (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm sorry, but this is an all-time grammatical low (Score:5, Insightful)
"These new provision"
"institutions of higher learn"
"We've previous discussed"
(At least) Three gross errors in one posted article. And to think that this is about federal funding for public colleges and universities. I humbly submit we need more.
How does this work? (Score:3, Insightful)
Strange but true (Score:3, Interesting)
How I see it is that RIAA and MPAA are failing to provide their content in a way that is easy, free of silly encumbrances, and are guilty of product tying. In other words, their bleetings are a product of their outmoded and protectionist practices, not because they actually add any value.
Put another way, if RIAA and MPAA are allowed to seek injunctions against receiving their products in a way they don't approve, I'd like to seek injunctions against every power company that provides electricity because it cuts into my profits in selling whale oil and whale oil lamps. Out moded business models should die because of market pressure, not thrive due to political contributions, rigged laws, or "The Disney Copyright Protection Act".
That said, Intellictual property is property, and depriving those that own it of legitimate compensation is theft. There are many inequities in movies, even more in music. But one cannot legitimately usurp agreed contracts of the creators of that IP, no matter how unfair it is to the creators. They agreed to it, after all.
I do not have any
If you don't like the people or the circumstances the work is made available under, the simple solution is to avoid the work. Don't buy it. Don't download it. Don't view it, and don't support them in any way. This is why I've not see a Sony move, bought a Sony CD, or purchsed a PC with Sony chips that I could avoid. (Not always possible, but you can TRY.)
For the same reason, I do not own Blue-Ray. I have HD-DVD. I may have to go to Blue-Ray as it displaces HD-DVD, but I'll only go there once HD-DVD is a thing of the past.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You don't get it, do you? When funding for education comes from the feds, the schools are vassals to the feds. The feudal system is already here, only now it's called socialism.
Want better schools? Then keep your money away from the feds, and spend it on schools that meet your standards, not the Ruling Party's standards.
-jcr
There's no such things as free money. (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously, I'm interested.. a ballpark figure is fine, i don't expect you to divulge your yearly earnings for everyone to see.. I mean, sure if you feel like boasting..
Point is.. You and I (and most people on this site, i imagine) earn more than the average person. Hell, I earn more than the average American, and i do it in a foreign currency with a lower value. For you and I, picking a school for our kids is a matter of choice. But we're relatively big fish... what about all those people who can't afford private schooling? Don't their kids deserve to be (at least potentially) useful, educated and productive members of society? I mean, there's only one alternative to that, and it's being a constant drain on welfare... Frankly, i'd rather have a bunch of rich people complaining about paying taxes so that poor kids can get educated than a bunch of rich people complaining because they were repeatedly mobbed by beggars just outside their door.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Second of all, no one is necessarily opposed to cracking down on piracy, we're opposed to the bullshit "you must offer an alternative" clause. Why don't we have all businesses making doing business with them mandatory while we're at it?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Wow, freedom of choice, that's new. And they're already bankrupt. Wouldn't it be great if it were in dollars too? Then we'd be rid of these distractions that waste our physical and financial lives.
"I don't know about you but most of my favorite movies weren't made in someones garage with a new mac. It's nice when people do that... bu
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Well bucko's, I hate to tell you this, you dont! The law makes it quite clear that you DO NOT have any right to do so and in point of fact doing so is a violation of said LAW and in knowingly violating said LAW you damn well deserve whatever happens to you either as a result of a criminal case or civil case brought against you.
Just because something is against the law doesn't make it wrong. For example, in countries that have more unjust laws than the US, such as China, do the journalists who break the law when they make negative reports about the government "deserve whatever happens" to them?
The purpose of copyright is not to make anyone money. It is to expand the public domain for the good of the public. Copyright law is meant to serve the public. The constitution says nothing about artists deserving to make any kind of m