Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Music Media Privacy Your Rights Online

University of Kansas Will Not Forward RIAA Letters 126

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."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

University of Kansas Will Not Forward RIAA Letters

Comments Filter:
  • In loco parentis (Score:3, Insightful)

    by athloi ( 1075845 ) on Friday July 27, 2007 @02:51PM (#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!
  • by __aaabsi3154 ( 1110199 ) on Friday July 27, 2007 @02:58PM (#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.
  • by 0100010001010011 ( 652467 ) on Friday July 27, 2007 @02:59PM (#20014663)
    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.
  • by kevinx ( 790831 ) on Friday July 27, 2007 @03:06PM (#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.
  • by reddburn ( 1109121 ) <[moc.liamg] [ta] [1nrubder]> on Friday July 27, 2007 @03:07PM (#20014771)
    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.
  • by kinglink ( 195330 ) on Friday July 27, 2007 @04:01PM (#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.
  • by cdrguru ( 88047 ) on Friday July 27, 2007 @04:42PM (#20016073) Homepage
    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 University doesn't consider the "account holder" to be responsible for all activity on the connection, then it could have been your Auntie Em or Cousin Bo. Or the guy leeching WiFi in the parking lot.
  • by Nom du Keyboard ( 633989 ) on Friday July 27, 2007 @04:52PM (#20016259)
    The other large university (Kansas State University) just blocks all P2P;

    At least you think you do.

  • by cdrguru ( 88047 ) on Friday July 27, 2007 @04:54PM (#20016271) Homepage
    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 could probably lose a lawsuit because your computer did something illegal. But the way this is set up today there is no proof. At a minimum I would think you would need a witness that saw you uploading at the exact time the alleged activity took place.

    The final note on this would be if someone created a "Trojan uploader" that was installed via email worm. You get it on your computer and it uploads music and video files without your knowledge. Or, at least your direct knowledge. Then your computer is independently performing illegal acts anyone participating. This would pretty much end the possibility of prosecuting anyone for anything involving the Internet.

    Emailed a threatening letter to the White House? Must have been MalMail. This is Windows, after all.

    Uploading copyrighted music? That SneakUploader is going around again. Have to clean the machine.

    Stabbed your wife 37 times with a dull fork? I'm afraid you're gonna have to take the rap for that one. Windows may be bad, but it isn't that bad yet.
  • by timrichardson ( 450256 ) * on Friday July 27, 2007 @05:08PM (#20016495) Homepage
    You should try that argument next time you get a parking ticket on your unattended car.

Make sure your code does nothing gracefully.

Working...