Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
typodupeerror delete not in
  • Preferences

Comments: 126 +-   University of Kansas Will Not Forward RIAA Letters on Friday July 27 2007, @01:41PM

Posted by Zonk on Friday July 27 2007, @01:41PM
from the not-quite-so-bad dept.
music
media
privacy
Bonewalker writes "Looks like the University of Kansas may not be as pro-RIAA (or anti-student) as initially assumed last week from our recent discussion. From the Chronicle article: 'Kansas officials told the student newspaper that they will not heed the recording industry's request to pass pre-litigation notices on to 14 students accused of music piracy. Many institutions have forwarded the letters -- which offer students a chance to settle file-sharing claims out of court at discounted rates -- but some have declined to do so, citing concerns over students' privacy.' Of course, this doesn't make that 'one-strike' policy any less flawed, but it shows that they aren't simply throwing their students under the RIAA bus, as one poster put it."
story

Related Stories

This discussion has been archived.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.

University of Kansas Will Not Forward RIAA Letters 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • Makes sense (Score:5, Funny)

    by niceone (992278) * on Friday July 27 2007, @01:46PM (#20014465) Journal
    Well, sure they won't. They're kicking the students out after one strike, so what's the point in forwarding a letter to someone who's no longer there!

    I'm JOKING... I think.
    • They're only cutting off the Net access. Not much difference though...

      • Re:Makes sense (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Rolgar (556636) on Friday July 27 2007, @02:06PM (#20014747)
        Well, this protects the university from litigation. If they cutoff only those users they get notices on, then they have a perfectly valid justification for shutting them off. These users are locked into student housing for the remainder of the semester, but they will know what risk they are taking if they P2P in the future, and will have to live with the consequences, and schools don't include a "legal protection from RIAA/MPAA fee" in the list of fees students are forced to pay. I don't get the anger over this issue, and I'm more disposed to hate KU than anybody.

        If students don't want to live with this policy, they can move off campus, and get AT&T or Cox broadband services. Sure it costs a LOT more to live off campus in Lawrence, but, if you want to do things like distribute other people's music, that is a choice you have to make. Of course, with the money you save by living on campus, you could buy the media you want and use your computer for classwork instead.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by zCyl (14362)

          If they cutoff only those users they get notices on, then they have a perfectly valid justification for shutting them off.

          Sounds like an easy college prank to play on unsuspecting people.

          (That's the problem with presumption of guilt upon accusation.)
        • What BS. The RIAA/MPAA evidence is very flawed. The only reason they get people to pay is that it is prohibitively expensive to fight this. This is a guilt until proven innocent regime. This is an abuse of the legal system.
          • The real question is if the RIAA has ever actually filed a lawsuit and won. So far, all the information I've seen says they have never, ever won a lawsuit only convinced some people to settle without a trial.

            If that is correct, then you are most certainly justified in your opinion.

            I suspect they have won far more than they have lost and are on-target 99% of the time. For various reasons such wins are never reported. They aren't "newsworthy" in the current sense of the word. If this is the case, then thi

        • Except that the RIAA have a history of sending out mistaken letters, and using legal threats as extortion. If the RIAA truly did their research, and only sent out letters to those who had actually been infringing their copyrights, you might have more of a point.

          Also on the list of fees students don't have to pay is an "RIAA legwork" fee for having the school figure out which student to forward the letter on to.

    • KU's rationale for One Strike Policy (Score:5, Informative)

      by Crittias (712785) on Friday July 27 2007, @03:41PM (#20016057)
      As a faculty member at University of Kansas, I had the opportunity to talk to someone involved in the one-strike decision. Here's how he described the process of reaching their decision, paraphrased by me: Originally, KU adopted a three-strikes policy, and a few years ago, it seemed effective, as some students, when confronted with their first or second strike, pleaded to misunderstanding the policies of ResNet regarding filesharing. Basically, the three strikes allowed for learning to occur. Recently, however, the attitude of students when they received their first or second strike was, "eh." Students were aware of the policy, and they were simply ignoring it because they knew they had two "get out of jail free" cards in their pocket. Because no learning seemed to be occurring when implementing a first or second strike, the school decided such warnings were ineffective, and thus the one-strike-and-you're-out policy we have now. I'm not arguing for or against the new policy, but I thought folks would find the rationale KU used to reach their decision interesting.

  • G.O.D. (Score:5, Funny)

    by Joebert (946227) on Friday July 27 2007, @01:48PM (#20014489) Homepage
    The RIAA could start a new branch, the Global Oversight Department, to oversee this stuff.
    They'd probably get a better response from places like Kansas with that branch.

    • Re:G.O.D. (Score:5, Funny)

      by BrianGKUAC (919321) on Friday July 27 2007, @02:13PM (#20014841)
      While that was quite funny, I live in town and work at the University. To outsiders, it can be hard to differentiate, but it has been said that Lawrence, Kansas, is 27 square miles of open and progressive thinking surrounded by Kansas.

      • True! (Score:3, Interesting)

        by tacokill (531275)
        We used to call it "The Berkley of the Midwest" back when I was there.

        Let's not forget that KU was where the student union was burnt down and classes were called early back during the Vietnam war. It was serious stuff.

  • In loco parentis (Score:3, Insightful)

    by athloi (1075845) on Friday July 27 2007, @01:51PM (#20014545) Homepage Journal
    I'm glad they decided to stand up for their students. College is (like it or not) partially a parent-replacement, and a good parent tries to discipline their kids before handing them over to the legal system for pirating a few bucks worth of thoughtless major label tunes. I am much more likely to send my kid to University of Kansas now!

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Nos. (179609)
      I don't think I quite agree with what you're saying, but I do agree with the actions being taken. The university is no position do discipline the students as you suggest. The university is doing what any organization should, protect its members' privacy.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by reddburn (1109121)
        But it is in a position to cut off their internet connection if they're using the university network for activity that puts the school in danger of lawsuit. Ask some random students if that is punishment and see what they say.
    • College students (except for the rare 17-year-old) are adults, and we should never forget this. A college has no business filling any portion of a parent's role, period.
      • It's probably for the best that the law generally recognizes age, rather than maturity. Otherwise, we'd expect to let folks off the hook their whole lives, just because they insist on maintaining a Peter Pan existence :)

  • "Discounted [settlement] rates"? (Score:5, Funny)

    by noidentity (188756) on Friday July 27 2007, @01:52PM (#20014567)
    "letters -- which offer students a chance to settle file-sharing claims out of court at discounted rates"

    Amazing, the RIAA is now in the business of offering discounted lawsuit settlements. "Our lowest offer ever! Settle for only $999, no evidence scrutinized! Limited time so act now!"
    • But SCO only charge $699! That's $300 cheaper! The RIAA are clearly a price-fixing cartel if they can get away with charging $300 above the market rate for extortion.

  • My ISP forwarded a letter to me (Score:5, Interesting)

    by bensafrickingenius (828123) on Friday July 27 2007, @01:52PM (#20014575)
    (I'm a home user, not a student) from HBO because they caught me uploading The Sopranos. Well, actually, I was downloading it, but using bittorrent so i was of course also uploading. Anyway, I was glad to see it was just a cease and desist kind of thing and not a settlement offer. I've been a little more careful since throwing away that pair of underwear, I must confess.
    • Anyway, I was glad to see it was just a cease and desist kind of thing and not a settlement offer. I've been a little more careful since throwing away that pair of underwear, I must confess.

      They wrote a "cease and desist" letter on a pair of underwear? Wow! They'd get a better compliance if they write it on a bra - IMHO.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by AndersOSU (873247)
      Comcast forwarded me a letter from NBC (via email no less) for sharing The Black Donnellys. I freaked out a little, but then reread the letter and it was a C&D, not a settlement offer.

      So I've complied and haven't downloaded any more TV shows.

      Incidentally I also never watched the Black Donnellys again (it wasn't on at a great time) and I think it's since been canceled.

  • Which only benefits the RIAA/MPAA. Which doesn't benefit the American middle-class, lower-class, or anyone outside of America. I know how this will all turn out though, just as smokers how nice it is that the rest of America is turning on their habit, sure they never thought that that would happen (not the best example though).

  • How does this help the student? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by dpbsmith (263124) on Friday July 27 2007, @02:18PM (#20014921) Homepage
    Are these sent by certified mail? Does the RIAA need proof of delivery to pursue their lawsuit successfully? Or can they just go ahead and sue, without the student getting any warning?

    All the article says is that "The University will not, however, forward students the RIAA pre-litigation letter, which gives them the opportunity to settle out of court."

    How does this help the student? That's a genuine question, not a rhetorical question. Anyone know the answer?

    • Honestly, I think it's going to help the RIAA by showing that they need more help from the powers that be to enforce what the law. I'm seriously thinking this could land some of the students in a lot more trouble then the university thinks.
    • Until the University gives the RIAA a name, all the RIAA has is an IP. I'd think the worst they could do is sue the school for the names of students associated with an IP address, then they'd have to send letters of notification to the students.
        • If the school forwards the letter, then it becomes clear that the school actually knows who has a particular IP address, and then the RIAA can eventually subpoena them to discover the name.
  • I'm proud that finally KU has stood up to outside pressure and is protecting its students. Coincidentally, their Academic Computing Services department (university wide IS/IT) is being completely reorganized.

    Just a few days ago I was ripping into old KU for pandering to the MAFIAA, and now we've got this partial about-face. Makes me want to walk over to walk over to the chancellor's house and tell him that this was a good decision.

  • I'm reminded of the godfather. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by kinglink (195330) on Friday July 27 2007, @03:01PM (#20015507)
    After Michael (Al Pacino's character) goes into hiding, Tom Hagen(Robert Duvall) says to Kay (Diane Keaton): "If I accept that letter and you told a Court of Law I accepted it, they would interpret it as my having knowledge of his whereabouts. Just wait Kay, he'll contact you."

    Somehow I don't think that's far off.

  • my letter to the RIAA... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by bennini (800479) on Friday July 27 2007, @03:08PM (#20015595) Homepage
    i posted this letter in the last story on /. regarding the RIAA but i did it a bit late (3 or 4 days after the story appeared on /.) so i dont think anyone got to read it.

    below ive appended the letter which i am sending to the RIAA.

    additionally, this recent story about the University of Kansas has inspired me to write letters to the other universities that have indeed forwarded the letters to the students -- regarding my decision to rule out all of them as places to do a PhD.

    i highly encourage all of you to send similar letters. its time people start doing something about this rather than just complaining about it on internet forums.

    --------

    Dear Sony BMG, Universal, EMI, Warner,

    I would like to inform you of my recent decision to stop purchasing music produced by your record labels.

    In the past, I was a strong supporter of the music industry, music artists and the Compact Disc technology. I regularly purchased CD albums for several reasons. First, I consider myself an audiophile and enjoy the quality of music offered by the Compact Disc format. Second, I collect music and have over 200 CDs. I often re-listen to an album many years after buying it. Third, I believe music artists should be rewarded for their hard work and skill. With respect to my favorite bands (Tool, the Cardigans and Garbage) I also believe it provides incentive for them to continue producing music. It was because of these three reasons that I generally opposed and condemned the idea of downloading music illegally. I considered myself to be, what many refer to as, the music industry's ideal customer.

    In the past few weeks, this all changed; and since your companies' prosperity in the music industry is entirely enabled by persons like myself, I would like to tell you why.

    I have grown tired of reading about the endless lawsuits and out-of-court settlement letters spewed from your companies' legal departments. I am a 25-year-old American student pursuing an MSc in Germany and find your methodology for dealing with students at American universities revolting and offensive. I also believe your companies' business model is flawed, rigid and destined to fail. Your inability to adapt to a high-quality digital distribution model (without DRM) will quickly undermine your revenue stream. There is no justification for a music CD to cost almost twice the price of a DVD movie; especially when one compares the production costs of the two.

    Today, when I walked into the local music store, I took a look at the price of a new CD release, considered buying it, then decided to go home and illegally download it instead. I will continue to act accordingly until the RIAA changes its attitude, business model and pricing scheme.

    This letter would not be justly sent without an offer to regain me as a customer. I therefore propose that you A) offer all music through iTunes DRM-free and with the option to download the files in a "lossless" format and B) reduce song prices to $0.50 per song with 50% of that going directly to the artist and the other 50% to be split at your discretion between the RIAA and Apple. Should you agree to said proposal, I will happily purchase your music again on a frequent basis and actively campaign for the RIAA amongst my social networks and on Slashdot.org.

    Sincerely,
    Benjamin P
    • How do we know you're not a goon from the RIAA sent to trick people into sending an admission of guilt?!?!!?

    • Wow, there are an amazing number of things wrong with your letter.

      1. Like many people on /. you seem to believe costs determine price. This is not the case. The justification is that people are willing to pay twice as much for a CD. Also, I tend to get more hours of enjoyment out of a CD than a movie (a good CD at least), because of the replayability.
      2. The RIAA doesn't get a percentage of iTunes sales, the labels do.
      3. While customers certainly have a right to insist on a price before purchasing, insisting o
  • Honestly i can't stand the fact that major universities, which are practically ran by their student population, wont even stand up for their students-- at least as far as privacy rights are concerned.
  • It's not enough to simply not pass on the letters. UK needs to fight the RIAA at the ex parte stage when the RIAA creates a phony case that:

    they have no intention of actually pursuing,

    citing non-applicable laws,

    with an illegal joinder of Doe Defendants,

    based on flimsy to non-existent real evidence,

    and no opposition to this farce,

    to get a judge to issue the required subpoena's that would force UK to turn over student identities to the Record Industry extortion machine. Only then will I feel tha

    • The letters are addressed to IP addresses. The RIAA expects the university to do its legwork for them. Next time, read TFA.

    • Re:What else do they decide to forward or not? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Shimdaddy2 (1110199) on Friday July 27 2007, @01:58PM (#20014645)
      The letters don't come with the student's name on them. Rather, the RIAA gives the university an ip and time of an alleged offense, and sticks the university with the charge of tracking down who that student is. This can be quite a bit of work, especially when the RIAA waits longer than the university keeps detailed logs. At my university, nearly 30 students were to be notified, but because detailed logs were only kept for 30 days only 7 seven students got letters.
    • The RIAA letters aren't sent in the mail. This isn't a USPS filtering.

      The RIAA contacts the university saying IPs X.X.X.X and Y.Y.Y.Y have been sharing songs. Please give the users this letter. Other universities have done the look up and found which users were those IP addresses belonged to and forwarded the letters on to the students. Kansas has effectively told the RIAA to fuck off.

      • Kansas has effectively told the RIAA to fuck off.

        IANAL - but it seems to me they've also effectively taken part in blocking a legal action. AIUI, that can make the University of Kansas liable/responsible.

        • Re:What else do they decide to forward or not? (Score:5, Interesting)

          by AuMatar (183847) on Friday July 27 2007, @02:17PM (#20014907)
          Well, you proved you aren't a lawyer here. There is a standard way to get the IP->name mapping. Its called a court order. You go before a judge, show your evidence, and if the judge agrees there's merit in the case they will order the university to hand the information over. Until then, the university is well within their rights to keep the information secret. If the state has any decent privacy laws, they may even be legally bound to do so.

          • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

            by superwiz (655733)
            You do realize that students' privacy cannot possibly (even theoretically) be violated by an act of communicating something TO THE STUDENTS as long as the students are the ONLY people to whom anything is communicated. They are not FORWARDING letters that are meant to be communications to the students. That can be done in a perfectly anonymous way. Ie., the letters can be given to the students without letting ANYONE ELSE know who these students are. So what privacy are we talking about here? All the art

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by cdrguru (88047)
            And the one flaw with this is that there isn't any "evidence" against the person until the person is identified. Woops. There is also a little problem - there is no one-to-one mapping of IP addresses to people. You can tie the IP address to a computer but it is completely unknown who was sitting at the keyboard.

            Oh, you can guess. And most of the time you'd be right. But it isn't proof. I suppose in a country where people are put to death for having the wrong skin color in the wrong place that you coul
      • Kansas has effectively told the RIAA to fuck off.

        Ahhh, 'effectively'. That one little word that separates fantasy from reality.
      • >>The RIAA contacts the university saying IPs X.X.X.X and Y.Y.Y.Y have been sharing songs.

        It seems like the university would be kind of obligated to at least once launch an internal investigation like they would for plagiarism - someone is claiming the university's resources are being used for illegal purposes. Until they do an investigation at least once, they have no idea how credible the RIAA and their claims are.

        They would not have to give up the names to anybody outside the university, but they c

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by cdrguru (88047)
          Why? Everything you do on the Internet is completely anonymous unless you (or your ISP) rats you out.

          If all they have is an IP address it does not show anything about who was at the keyboard. If they get that far, they can examine the computer and find pirated files. This still does not say who was at the keyboard when that occurred. Are you responsible for everything your computer does? Ever heard of spyware and BackOrifice? Of course you can't be held responsible for files on your computer.

          If the Un
    • I think the letters are usually sent by the RIAA to a certain IP address, the college then looks up the student in the IT records and forwards the letter to them. If KU does not forward these letters then RIAA will have to file a subpoena/DMCA/etc to get the students ID info from the university.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by ecklesweb (713901)
      From a short article in the Chronicle that accompanies a copy of the actual letter sent by Cary Sherman to university presidents [chronicle.com]:

      5. Some campus administrators already worry that the record industry's pre-litigation notices will leave colleges exposed to lawsuits. If colleges are given the task of passing on the letters, information-technology officials ask, couldn't they end up being sued by students who say they never got the notices -- and, therefore, missed the chance to settle their cases at a discount?

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by exabrial (818005)
      Kansas University is a pretty big school (~40k students I think...) The other large university (Kansas State University) just blocks all P2P; I used to work for the Enterprise Server group there.
      • Close, I think its about 36k students including the Medical School in KC and Wichita, and the Edwards campus. The network is old, open, in some places not well organized, and only in the last couple years has seen major updates. K-State even had functioning campus wireless before KU, although KU's is more advanced.
      • The other large university (Kansas State University) just blocks all P2P;

        At least you think you do.

    • Re:What else do they decide to forward or not? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by kevinx (790831) on Friday July 27 2007, @02:06PM (#20014763)
      I fail to see how it would be the responsibility of the University to do dirty work of the RIAA regardless of their stance on music/file sharing. If they were responsible that would mean the provider of internet access is responsible for the way it's subscribers utilize their service. I'm sure the school, in most cases would attempt to pass on notices to students unless it goes against policy, but what is somewhat different about this case is that the RIAA is somehow imposing responsibility on the school. Even though the involvement at this point is minimal, it's a slippery slope that could lead to the university policing it's students or acting as an intermediary in a potentially tricky legal situation. 14 letters soon becomes 1400 letters, and then starts using up university resources. Now they have direct relationship between the RIAA and the school, where it is assumed the school is going to handle this burden of distribution at a minimum.
Search
It doesn't matter what you do, it only matters what you say you've done and what you're going to do.

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.