I work in higher education IT management. Although we have policies against violating copyright, discuss copyright with all freshmen, and provide legal alternatives (Napster and iTunes), some students acquire music and movies the old fashioned way: the steal it.
The RIAA and MPAA have an idea on how to cut the theft and Harry Reid is their man. He's about to introduce withdrew an ammendment to the Higher Education Act that will require big colleges to do the bidding of the RIAA, MPAA, and their associates. A new higher ed copyright ammendment is being drafted.
According to the Chronicle of Higher Education:
Senator Reid's proposal would require the 25 colleges and universities believed to harbor the most cases of copyright infringement to start using costly technology solutions to more explicitly detect and eliminate illegal file sharing. The Recording Industry Association of America and the Motion Picture Association of America would identify the institutions.
This isn't a diary about fair use (stealing isn't fair) -- it's about how Harry Reid is going to turn the government on its head to serve corporations.
Updated July 24, 6:30am EDT: Reid withdrew the amendment late Monday. A revised amendment, which hasn't yet been written, will likely be part of the language voted on Thursday by the full senate. According to Inside Higher Ed:
the new version of Reid’s amendment would focus only on requiring colleges to do significantly more reporting to their students about the illegality of unauthorized file sharing of copyright material and the penalties individual violators face if they download illegally, among other things.
Students and others shouldn't steal, even if the victims aren't sympathetic (and the RIAA seems to do all that it can to ensure that it isn't), because stealing is illegal, unethical, and immoral. That said, many people still do steal and our university gets and deals with legitimate complaints from the content industry every month. In recent months we've seen an up-tick in the number of students being sued over their downloading/uploading actions. (The typical settlement is around $3,500 plus the student's legal fees.)
However, college campuses aren't the only source of illegal downloading. As broadband speeds to homes increase with FiOS and other new services, the ratio of on-campus to off-campus downloading is going to shift to the home because downloading at home will become less slow. Universities, however, are pioneers for legal uses of peer-to-peer (P2P) technologies. Legislation like that proposed by Reid will stifle the spirit of innovation that make American higher education a model for other countries.
From the Chronicle of Higher Education:
The Senate is scheduled to begin debate today on long-awaited legislation to reauthorize, or renew, the Higher Education Act. Sen. Harry M. Reid, Democrat of Nevada and the Senate majority leader, is expected to propose an amendment that would require many of the largest colleges to use technology designed to prevent students from illegally downloading and swapping music and movie files.
The measure, which four powerful higher-education associations and many campus technology experts oppose, is the federal government's latest attempt at regulating institutions' day-to-day operations, critics say. The technology to prevent piracy may not even work and could cost universities hundreds of thousands of dollars, they say.
Educause, the nonprofit association whose mission is to advance higher education by promoting the intelligent use of information technology, warns that the Reid amendment effectively:
- Makes the Secretary of Education an agent of the entertainment industry,
- Requires the Secretary to take action against schools based solely on possibly inaccurate accusations lodged by the industry,
- Requires that targeted schools implement a "technical solution" even though one may not exist or may result in increased tuition costs,
- Ignores non-educational ISPs like AOL, Comcast, Earthlink, Verizon, and others.
The entertainment industry is right to be seeking redress. Something does need to be done to reduce the rampant theft. Maybe that will require technical steps (DRM?), maybe new educational programs (it is odd that a huge portion of the market for such goods think that the good have little economic value), maybe it's new business models that cater to the evolving technology and social ethic (the MPAA has been more adept than the RIAA at handling such changes).
As it currently exists, this amendment is dangerous for what it does to smother innovation in higher education, hold the service provider responsible for the actions of its users, quash the concept of innocence until guilt is proved, and upset the relationship of the people, government and corporations. It will likely be ineffective except as a wedge to expand its scope to include smaller schools and other types of ISPs. Some day, all content could be scanned and transmitted only if deemed appropriate to a variety of corporate interests.
I urge you to tell Harry Reid that this amendment is the wrong way to do a right thing.