RIAA Afraid of Harvard 425
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "According to a report on p2pnet.net, the RIAA's latest anti-college round of "early settlement" letters targets 7 out of 8 Ivy League schools, but continues to give Harvard University a wide berth. This is perhaps the most astonishing display of cowardice exhibited to date by the multinational cartel of SONY BMG, Warner Bros. Records, EMI, and Vivendi/Universal (the "Big Four" record companies, which are rapidly becoming less "big"). The lesson to be drawn by other colleges and universities: "All bullies are cowards. Appeasement of bullies doesn't work. Standing up to bullies and fighting back has a much higher success rate.""
Appeasement is often cheaper (Score:2, Insightful)
We also paid tens of thousands of dollars to a teacher who didn't pass his probation because it would be cheaper than paying lawyers.
The reason is much simpler (Score:5, Insightful)
Now, who do they have their knowledge from? The profs there. When you teach, do you tell your student everything you know? More important, when you learn, do you know afterwards as much as your teacher does?
Rarely loses the master against his padawan. So to challenge him, a fool you must be.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Thank youuuu Yoda.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No, I am not a member of Yoda's species.
Re:The reason is much simpler (Score:4, Funny)
Re:The reason is much simpler (Score:5, Funny)
Fixed that for you, I did.
Re:The reason is much simpler (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:The reason is much simpler (Score:5, Funny)
That would make a good senior project: "Students, your assignment this year is to put the kibosh on the Recording Industry Association of America's lawsuit mill."
I'm a senior at Harvard (Score:5, Interesting)
1) most kids here are too busy with chairing their Model-UN-Investment-Banking-Labor-Movement meeting to even care about music, so they listen to a few cds and buy tracks from itunes (like many college campuses with high tuition, most kids have some hardware from apple) and hear most of their music on the loudspeakers at god-awful binge drinking parties
2) the few kids who listen to a lot of music are into indie bands, and the RIAA seems to go after folks who download more popular tunes. also there's pretty significant downloading/computer-illiteracy here (kids dont have the time to waste playing with the computer, and thus dont really understand where to get music illegally)
3) there's only like a couple hundred cs majors here, and there's only one out of that group with immaculate taste in music (me!) so I'm probably the only person at harvard that the RIAA could ever be angry at, but I don't download music.
There's nobody to sue!
Note to reader: The error bounds on this comprehensive study may be non-trivial.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
I find, or at least going for my CS degree, that I knew more than my professors. While going to school part time, I commonly experienced the "so that's what you call what I have been doing." Or, "5 steps to normalization? I thought it was one step...look at it and the schema pops up into your head."
Law school teaches the theory of law, not the practice of law.
Re: (Score:2)
If by saying "I knew more than my professors" you mean "I knew something they didn't" I would believe you. However, "I learned nothing from them" is quite another thing. It means you really didn't know what they knew, or their knowledge proves to have little value to you. Knowledge can't be quantified on a scale.
At any rate, this condescending "I knew more than my professors" attitude won't help you get the most out of your education. It's a shame you were only able to come up with "so that's what you cal
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The actual computer science, I learned from books. The profs were really just props, decoys to make it look like it was a teaching establishment. All but two were complete doorknobs; one was a brilliant but misunderstood hacker, the other was a humble but honest developer who had no fear asking his own questions. Those two had my respect, all the other used-car salesmen, outdated COBOL monke
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Neither is what he said, thought. He simply asserted that the sum total of his knowledge at the time he was going to school was greater than the sum total of any one of his professor's knowledge; I believe that the implied plural - the sum total of all his professors combined knowledge - was not what he meant. In no way does this imply t
Re:The reason is much simpler (Score:5, Insightful)
In the process of getting a PHD is normally a process or specialization. It is quite common for New CS Undergrads to be better versed in newer technologies then many the professors especially near the end of your degree. First Computer Science as a study is a new area of study and Many of the CS professors have their Undergrad and Graduate Degrees in different areas of study, Engineering, Accounting, Physics, Mathematics, Business... Then got the Masters or PHD later on, in that process you just focus more on one area... Software Optimization, Artificial Intelligence, Neural Networks, Operating Systems, Programming Languages, etc... So they were privy to your general education in Computer Science as well because of their focus they tend to stay focus on their focus.... So you may be able to Out Program most professors in most applications, but if you go up against them in their speciality they can blow you away with concepts and designs that you may never have considered. Also if they did study the degree for their Undergrad they were focused on the current modern methods, Punch Cards, Fortran, Basic (no visual about it), Pascal, etc... they were concerned about application that run on mainframe terminals, reading off of tape, etc...
I am not saying that college Professors are super human ultra intelligent people who can code a computer using a metal file. As well I am not saying you are a bad programmer, I have never seen your work. But there is a tendency among programmers to think they are the best programmer in the world which in case they are actually average. And College Professors shouldn't be underestimated because then you will loose a lot of good education because of you closed mindedness. As well you cannot assume the Professor knows it all because it will reduce you ability to extend beyond what is taught by these specialist.
I am talking for experience, I use to be a Hot Headed programmer, slamming my profs behind their back because I could out program them. But I am a good generalist programmer so I can do most programming well, but I rarely able to do any thing exceptional. I am good at what I do and my clients agree. But can I do it all no.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:The reason is much simpler (Score:4, Interesting)
Now, he was already challenged by turning his laptop on, which is why he was one of the few who refused to use anything but chalk and blackboard to do his lectures. No powerpoint, not even overhead projector, the less tech the better.
Do I know more about programming than he does? Heck, anyone who has touched VB does. Would I dare to say I can hold a candle to him in math? Never. And I was good in math.
You will never know as much as your teacher in his subject after leaving him. That is a given. If your teacher is your primary if not only source of information about a subject, you're prone to know less about it than him. At best, you can know as much as he does. And even after leaving him and continuing on your own, he has a head start you can hardly catch up to.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:The reason is much simpler (Score:4, Insightful)
If you're halfway competent and intelligent, you continue to learn from experience, and very soon know MORE than your teachers did.
If that wasn't the case, knowledge would continue to shrink, as a bit of it is lost every generation, while in reality, the opposite is true.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Just ask a search engine [google.com].
I disagree with your point, too. The sum of human knowledge does indeed improve over time, by most definitions of "sum of knowledge." We still have records of almost everything that was done since recorded history. What has been lost is not nearly as much as has bee
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Still... (Score:5, Insightful)
Sorry, it's just that that phrase seems to carry a certain hubris that irritates me.
Re: (Score:2)
I was just trying to counter the phrase in the GP with another phrase. These soundbytes are rarely relevant.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Knowing how to TEACH is much more difficult than knowing the subject.
I have very poor teacher that knew a lot about the subject. I learned nothing from them.
I had great teacher that knew the subject well, but not lots. I learned a lot from them.
Anyone can know about any subject. All it takes is a book and some practice (to understand it). However, try and teach a bunch of teenager kids, and your views of teaching will change very fast.
Good teacher are a rarity. If you take
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Actually, they're suing 7/8 of the Ivy League. (Score:4, Interesting)
If they sued a university or college, they'd have a fight on their hand... which is what the RIAA assiduously avoids.
Cowards, maybe... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Cowards, maybe... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
If you believed the US News rankings (I don't), YLS would be the top rated school. But I don't know if I'd go with the Yale grad; I'd probably take someone from Boalt--someone from a school where it's actually challenging to receive high marks. ;-)
As a lawyer... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Cowards, maybe... (Score:5, Insightful)
No, do not disturb the 350-year-old 800-lb gorilla who has lots of friends and big piles of cash.
Re:Cowards, maybe... (Score:5, Funny)
Cowardly? Give me a break. (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm as disgusted with the RIAA's tactics as anyone, but this childish name calling is getting old. It seems like every day on the front page of Slashdot is some article title with an overblown ad hominem attack against persons, groups or companies that rub us the wrong way. C'mon, people. We're smart, educated and savvy, do we really need to stoop to this?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Yeah, see i really could care less how low anyone stoops against them. In fact, you think of the most immoral acts that could be committed to their employee's, and i still wouldn't care.
Re: (Score:2)
We are? Wow. Are you sure you're posting on the right board?
do we really need to stoop to this?
Well if we didn't it's be left to b3ta and 4chan. The internets don't deserve that
Re:Cowardly? Give me a break. (Score:5, Informative)
And the tactics the RIAA lawyers use are inexcusable.
I've been in the litigation field for 34 years, and I've never seen anything like them.
Question. You say "I'm as disgusted with the RIAA's tactics as anyone". If you're aware of their doctored non-evidence, their misstatements of fact, their misstatements of law, their abuse of the federal judicial system, and their inappropriate tactics... are you suggesting something like that is not "stuff that matters" or "news for nerds"?
Re:Cowardly? Give me a break. (Score:5, Interesting)
Many thanks for your fine work in this area.
I have an experience leading to a question. I was involved in a civil suit, the other side's attorney pulled shenanigans, lying to the court, etc. My lawyer was incensed, and it seemed the suit was going to drag on for years, so he offered to settle with me for my hoped-for amount out of his pocket provided I release him to sue the other attorney (he was going to make way more money that way, he was that confident). I was ok with that, so that's how it went down.
From that, I learned that attorneys can be sued for shenanigans - malfeasance? - and that's my question(s). Could the RIAA be stopped that way? Attorneys are officers of the court, that makes them liable for malfeasance charges, doesn't it? If not in court, what about the Bar Association(s)? (All I know about the bar I learned on TV.....)
Can't the attorneys be punished and thereby discourage those practices? Is our system so broken that the answer is really no?
Thanks,
Earl
Re:Cowardly? Give me a break. (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Cowardly? Give me a break. (Score:5, Informative)
Here [blogspot.com] they were caught in a lie to the Judge; here [blogspot.com] the Judge figured out that they were lying about an "emergency" need to file their cases WITHOUT NOTICE to the other side; here [blogspot.com] we discuss the fact that even though their expert witness has admitted that their investigator did not "detect" an individual, the RIAA's lawyers continue to sign false court papers stating to the Court that their investigator "detected an individual"; here [blogspot.com]'s a recent pack of those lies which they submitted, in an undefended case, where the Judge realized that their first presentation of evidence didn't point to an infringement by the defendant; here [blogspot.com]'s that Judge, and here [blogspot.com]'s the State Attorney General of Oregon, catching them in those lies; and here [blogspot.com]'s the junk science put forth by their 'expert', whose real 'expertise' is getting LAN operators to fork over $76,000 at a time [blogspot.com] in protection money in order to make the RIAA and him go away.
Re:Cowardly? Give me a break. (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Cowardly? Give me a break. (Score:5, Interesting)
I also wonder if there might be a way to bring in this evidence at each and every trial. Unfortunately I can think of one very negative side effect for those defending against such tactics - weighing this evidence might make trials more costly (favouring the RIAA's deep pockets). However if it were presented well might it not be the difference between winning and losing? If done right is there any chance that showing this consistent abuse might result in similar actions being thrown out summarily?
Surely there is something in the system that attempts to limit repeated abuse/harassment? Some kind of provision for those who cry wolf and tie the courts up. If not there sure ought to be.
Are these thoughts pure fantasy or might this work in the real world? I defer to your wisdom in this. I am certainly not a lawyer. (I'm not even an American).
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Cowardly? Give me a break. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Cowardly? Give me a break. (Score:5, Insightful)
If they thought what they were doing was legitimate they'd take on Harvard too. Harvard gets sued all the time. Just not by people like this.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Both.
What do you think qualifies as cowardice, if not avoiding all those who can actually, fairly compete with you?
Re:Cowardly? Give me a break. (Score:5, Insightful)
The fact that they DO hesitate indicates that they really are bullying -- they're taking cases they know have problems and pushing them only against those they see as weak enough not to recognize that weakness.
Harvard = death star (Score:5, Funny)
Pushing around smaller and less reputable colleges and students may be fine and dandy...but trying to shove your weight around against Harvard is like lil timmy firing his peashooter at the deathstar, the RIAA would be decimated and a huge precedent would be set. Better to just leav'em be.
Re:Harvard = death star (Score:5, Funny)
Many paralegals died to bring us this information.
Try Freenet (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Try Freenet (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, here's one good reason:
1. You've correctly realized that the media companies don't really care if you're sharing files legally or not.
I'm sure the rest of you can add to this list.
Re: (Score:2)
You could also just be opposed to copyright and want to share copyrighted material without risk of being sued, and many people do.
If you're really opposed to copyright, why not just avoid works where the creators assert copyright law against you rather than using it in your benefit such as GPL, Creative Commons, etc.? Your downloading of copyrighted materials is not an act of civil disobedience unless you do it publicly. It's almost like a drug user saying they secretly and anonymously do heroin because they're against the current drug laws. That's bullshit -- they're just addicts. It sounds like you're addicted to the movies you
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
PS That case isn't over yet.
Re: (Score:2)
The funny thing is... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:The funny thing is... (Score:5, Insightful)
Actors and musicians also don't get paid for the time they actually spend doing most of the work--creating, rehearsing, making modifications, planning performances, and the like--you know, the kind of things YOU do at work while the money keeps rolling in before you finish. Artists, on the other hand, don't get paid until the work is done and rely on income for the performance. They get paid a lot because they get paid in lump sums.
Frankly, people like you who reduce an entire industry filled with legitimate artists, millions of middle-class employees, and hardworking entertainers who love what they do to the same level as some slimy fat cats in it are just as bad as the RIAA. By your logic, doctors are cheap hacks, too. You shouldn't pay your bill because you don't think they should charge so much or have unattractive offices. They don't deserve nice houses or things that you, Joe Armchair, would be jealous of.
Hmmm... (Score:2)
Harvard- 350 year history, $2 billion endowment, alumni include Senators, supreme court justices, some of the
best lawyers in the country.
RIAA: Hello Harvard, we want you to hand over the names of students and put our filters on your internet access
Harvard President: No
RIAA: If you dont we'll sue
Harvard President: (chuckle) Let me think about that, who do we know that went to our school.
(checks the alumni directory)
John Roberts
Antonin Scalia
David Souter
Anthony Kennedy
What's happening at Yale? (Score:5, Interesting)
So what's going on between the RIAA/MPAA and Yale? Does Yale's reputation as being the "nice" law school (if that's not an oxymoron) result in them being attacked more or less? Anyone have data?
Just curious
Re:What's happening at Yale? (Score:5, Informative)
The Reason (Score:5, Insightful)
Berkman is very forward-looking and proactive regarding emerging issues of Law and Technology. The various fellows have been vocal and supportive of copyright reform. With such an interested, knowledgeable band of law professors and law students, it would be a serious black-eye if the RIAA attempted to litigate on the Harvard campus. I have to believe that they would be handed a bruising defeat, that would establish precedent regarding their campaign of extorting* settlement monies from poor college students.
* I mean extortion in the common, non-technical sense. Don't sue me for libel please.
Berklee and Julliard also immune seemingly (Score:5, Interesting)
Then again, while music students have more music downloaded/shared in general than almost anyone else I know, they also actually purchase more music than anyone I know.
Think like a lawyer. (Score:2)
You test strategies in the lower courts. You test strategies on appeal. You establish significant precedents in courts that are not intimidated by the Harvard grad.
The Harvard student is not the typical poster child for the EFF.
He holds a very privileged position. He is supposed to represent academic excellence and personal integrity. He is likely being supported by very generous scholarships, subsid
Circumstantial Evidence (Score:4, Insightful)
1) They know they're case(s) are weak
2) Their campaign is most certainly not about suing wrongdoers. It's about calculated methods to change copyright by case law.
Really this won't stop until someone with resources starts playing in their playground.
That is, attacks the xIAA for racketeering, price fixing, extortion, by way of the civil courts this is not likely to end soon.
The US legal system is simply broken. Our society treats corporations as equals, yet they are designed to pool capital. Anyone can sue, with little recourse, and if you have enough money, you can make it so the average man cannot possibly fight back. Meanwhile, all the time that you spend fighting the lawsuit, you find it very difficult to better your life in any other way, even save and/or invest.
And if you start talking about methods to put the system back in check... well then you are labeled a socialist or a communist. There has been legislation all throughout the preeminent authority's tenure on free market capitalism, but I dare you to start talking about Antitrust legislation now.
But I digresss...
United we stand, Divided we Fall (Score:3, Insightful)
An Open Letter to Dorks and Losers (Score:5, Funny)
Hello. My name is Terrence "Mongo" Rennet, and I represent the American Council of Bullies, Toughs, and Schoolyard Ruffians. I'm here to clear up some tragic misconceptions about bullies and their place in the academic hierarchy, misconceptions that have gone unchallenged for too long. It is my hope that by "clearing the air," as it were, bullies and bullied can walk with head erect or cower behind lockers respectively with a newfound respect for one another.
Myth: Bullies are just jealous of your intelligence, sensitivity, or ability to play the oboe.
Fact: Bullies have no more jealousy of your mental abilities than we have of your clean, well-ironed, unfashionable clothing. To the contrary, we are profoundly glad that you have chosen to develop your mental prowess, leaving your body weak and defenseless against our brutality. For that we thank you, even as we elevate your underwear.
Myth: Bullies suffer from low self-esteem, and victimize others to make themselves feel better.
Fact: While each bully has his (or her, as is increasingly the case) own deeply personal reasons for bullying, I can assure you that a poor self-image is not one of them. To the contrary, bullying is a high-pressure occupation, and only someone with an unusual amount of self-confidence will have the elán to shake down younger students efficiently while evading authority. Children without self-confidence tend instead to spend recess in the library, the computer lab, or pretending to be warriors in ridiculous fantasy games. Sound familiar?
Myth: If you stand up to a bully, he will reveal himself to be a coward.
Fact: This is perhaps the most hurtful stereotype of them all, in the sense that if you try it we will hurt you. Endless movies and after-school specials depict a tormented victim finally working up the courage to attack his neighborhood bully, after which said bully runs away crying and -- I must chuckle here -- calling for his mommy. What writers of these "entertainments" don't realize is that bullies invariably establish a complex ritual pecking order through constant low-level violence against each other. Haven't you noticed us punching each other in the shoulder at the bus stop? Then you've witnessed the magic of our social structure. Even if you, with your weak, gelatin-like arms were able to do us physical harm, I can assure you that we would recover faster than you can recite your grade point average and teach you a few things about savage poundings you can't learn from Spider-Man comics.
With that thought, I take your leave, confident that I have, in my own small way, improved the world's understanding of the art and craft of bullying. Good day, and if I see you after school you're dead meat.
brunching.com [brunching.com]
Re:An Open Letter to Dorks and Losers (Score:4, Interesting)
I am sure even you will agree that
1. Appeasement would never deter a bully.
2. A 'dork' or 'loser', or apparent dork or loser, standing up to a bully, enjoys the element of surprise.
3. Courage is a measure of internal fortitude and heart, not a measure of physical prowess.
4. Throughout history, there have been many instances in which courage carried the day against physically superior force.
As to any suggestion that the RIAA lawyers, who likely occupy leadership positions within your organization, will prevail... we shall see, we shall see.
With all due respect to the fine work carried on by your organization, I must reiterate; all bullies are cowards. I call upon your members to follow the lead of Darth Vader, and abandon the ways of the Dark Side.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Elephant and Mouse situation (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Why? (Score:3, Interesting)
They don't really need to cost us anything. They're a self-autonomous entity, capable of earning the money to sustain itself off people who like what they do, and because there are many people out there who do, they are very valuable. The only reason they're having any significant impact on the rest of society is because of piracy. I would have thought that piracy itself would be the liability here.
An analogy: a man keeps getting assaulted by assassins, and cries foul murder over and over again. Everybo
Re:Elephant and Mouse situation (Score:4, Funny)
With competent assassins, this becomes much harder.
Or are we talking zombies and ninja assassins here? 'Cause that'd make a great movie.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Of course (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
The way I see it, as bad as these lawsuits are, they will eventually come to an end. The content companies are going to have to reach some accommodation with modern technology whether they like it or not, however hard they try to turn bac
Re: (Score:2)
Look at the situation: The internet (easily one of the most influential media today) is full of anti-RIAA sentiments, artists are antagoizing the corporations (like Weird Al with his satiric song "Don't Copy This CD" or Trent Rezor asking his fans to "steal" his CDs be
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
No it's not (Score:3, Informative)
I'm not sure if you're confused or just being a karma whore with the links, but no, the submitter of the story is not Charles Nesson. It would appear to be Ray Beckerman. Or better still, Ray Beckerman. [wikipedia.org]
Re:No it's not (Score:5, Informative)
Re:No it's not - you are right and I am sorry! (Score:2)
Re:Submitter is Charles Nesson, Professor of Law (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Incorrect Information (Score:5, Informative)
Re:RICO (Score:5, Insightful)
And that's not a troll, exactly how?
How on earth did Creationists get categorically thrown into the same class of groups as the RIAA, Nazis, and patent lawyers?
I'm agnostic, but I know many Creationists who are just trying to find the world view that makes the best sense of their experiences, their reasoning, and various bits of historical evidence. I'm getting pissed that popular sentiment on /. is becoming that Creationists are a bunch of evil, ignorant bastards who are out to wreck the public teaching of science.
Creationism is a world view and a particular take on history, not a political practice. You might judge some Creationists to hold their views for bad reasons or insufficient evidence, but the same could be said of many reductionist evolutionists. But I know plenty of people smart, articulate reasons who understand the debate and have judged it more probable that creationism (not necessarily young-earth creationism) is the most-likely correct account of natural history.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The attitude that comes across from so many non-American posters on Slashdot is interesting. They feel perfectly free to lump ALL Americans into some arbitrary (usually negative) category, criticize us, and call us names (even though we built the largest industrial economy and military on the planet, not something usually accomplished by Flat Earthers.) On the other hand, if an American says anything remotely similar you tak
Re:not cowardice (Score:4, Informative)
Expert Witness Defense Fund [fsf.org] (For technical expert witnesses, technical consultants, and computer forensic examiners);
Marie Lindor Legal Defense Fund [blogspot.com] (For defense of UMG v. Lindor [blogspot.com]);
Jammie Thomas Legal Defense Fund [blogspot.com] (For defense of Capitol v. Thomas [blogspot.com]).
Re: (Score:3, Informative)