Slashdot Log In
University of Kansas Adopts 'One Strike' Copyright Infringement Policy
Posted by
Zonk
on Sat Jul 21, 2007 03:51 AM
from the hope-you-really-liked-that-cher-album dept.
from the hope-you-really-liked-that-cher-album dept.
NewmanKU writes "Eric Bangeman at Ars Technica writes that the University of Kansas has adopted a new, and very strict, copyright infringement policy for the students on the residential network. The university's ResNet website states that, 'Violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act is against the law. If you are caught downloading copyrighted material, you will lose your ResNet privileges forever. No second notices, no excuses, no refunds. One violation and your ResNet internet access is gone for as long as you reside on campus.' According to a KU spokesperson, KU has received 345 notices in the past year from organizations and businesses regarding complaints about copyrighted material downloading."
Related Stories
[+]
News: University of Kansas Will Not Forward RIAA Letters 126 comments
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This discussion has been archived.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.
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.
Due Process (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Due Process (Score:5, Insightful)
Cutting you off the campus net is an entirely private decision, no due process required by law.
Think of it like getting banned from a forum because the admin thinks you are a troll.
Parent
Re:Due Process (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Due Process (Score:5, Interesting)
Just because you put something in your TOS does not make it legal or enforceable. IANAL, but I am an admin on a university network and we are frequently reminded that the students are paying customers with rights and as such we cannot arbitrarily ban them from using the system. Without some kind of watertight right of appeal someone probably will get caught as a false positive by this policy, sue, and win.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Due Process (Score:5, Insightful)
They clearly place the interests of their customers first and foremost.
I'm going to send that university a letter telling them I'm not hiring any of their graduates because of their asinine behavior.
Parent
Re:Due Process (Score:4, Insightful)
Seems like you're just adding to the pile of crap the students have to put up with.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
In this case, the education of stopping an activity in favor of just a claim and showing the students that this behavior is acceptable isn't the same values of ethics I wan
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
We've seen articles like this on slashdot regading Stanford, U. of Washington, etc (those KU's looks to be the harshest), and slashdotters say, "boycott the school, attend coll
Re:Due Process (Score:4, Insightful)
I didn't realize tuition was free.
No seriously, I wonder why copyright infringement was singled out. If you park illegally on campus, do they remove your parking privileges forever? If you take more than your fair share in the dorm cafeteria, can you no longer eat on campus?
Sounds just alleging copyright violations at KU carries one of the harshest penalties. I wonder if you don't properly attribute your sources in a paper if they break your fingers? Anyway, if I was on the internet at KU, I'd try to encrypt all my traffic. Some idiotic letter comes from an RIAA lawyer, and the next thing you know, you might as well leave school.
Parent
Re:Due Process (Score:5, Funny)
I dunno... Let's say I have this jock room mate that I hate because he always gets the girls (and brings them to the top bunk when I'm trying to get a good nights sleep) so lets just say I theoretically put P2P software on his unpassworded computer and share out some Boy George songs.
Not only will he get booted off ResNet without recourse, but all the girls will think he's gay now when they look at his MP3 collection.
Parent
Re:Due Process (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Your money.
Okay, they didn't have your money yet, but you didn't have the music -- and you obviously want it, else you wouldn't have downloaded it.
So "your money" is a shorthand way of saying "A legitimate expectation that you would either buy from them or do without, which you have circumvented b
Oh crap... (Score:5, Interesting)
From the universities page: (which I downloaded into my browser...)
And further down, on the same page! (Which my browser downloaded, remember)...
Wow, that is harsh! I guess that's me banned then :-)
Re:Oh crap... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yep. In fact, as a signatory to the Berne Convention, in the US copyright exists in every work not explicitly released into the publci domain. Which makes it a particularly stupid thing to say. I mean it is fairly obvious that they mean "no unauthorised downloading of copyright material", but if they really plan to implement a "no excuses, no appeal" policy, you'd think they'd take the 30 seconds or so it needed to phrase the thing correctly.
Even then, it's still way OTT. Half the papers on Citeseer (for instance) are there in technical violation of the copyright of the journals where they were first published. The journals turn a blind eye, which is why the site can keep on, but I can see a lot of sudents getting banned, which considering how widely used citeseer is as an academic resource, is a but ridiculous.
I suppose the only other way they could implement the policy as expressed is to rely on the word "caught". That way, if they don't look for downloaders, they don't find them, and selective enforcement becomes the order of the day. I suppose it might be useful if the they forsee needing a pretext to silence unruly students.
Parent
Re:Oh crap... (Score:5, Informative)
*All* works, unless they carry a notice explicitly putting them into the public domain, are automatically copyrighted by the author[0]. They do not need a copyright notice for them to be copyrighted.
Now, as the author, you may make your work (web page) available for people to download for free; that is your right. And because you, as the copyright holder, are the one who has made the work available, the end users aren't breaking copyright by downloading it.
*However*, they are still *downloading copyrighted materials*. They may be doing so legally, but that is not what the rule cares about. The rule states that merely downloading copyrighted materials is grounds for account termination.
[0] Or, if it is a work-for-hire or similar, the work might be copyrighted by an entity other than the author. But it is still copyrighted.
Parent
Lack of Caring (Score:5, Interesting)
Pulling authoritarian crap like this in a place where people are naturally rebelling against everything and anything is a good way to get egg on your face.
Re:Lack of Caring (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Everybody who buys a "class notes" book from the bookstore should write down the publisher of every work copied in the books, and confirm that the school indeed obtained permission from the publisher to make the copies, as well as noting how many people are in the class to see how many copies were made. Ditto all class handouts.
Re: (Score:2)
At least at my university [ucr.edu], the need to obtain permission and license the copyrighted works appropriately is one of the reasons why course readers can be so unbelievably expensive. [I've seen 200 page reader
Re: (Score:2)
Downloading copyrighted material is perfectly legal, it's distributing it without permission is what is illegal. The DMCA have made matters rather odd over there in the U.S though. I'm glad I live here in Sweden where I don't have to worry abo
Re:Lack of Caring (Score:4, Informative)
This is typical slashdot behavior. Take everything out of context so everybody can get riled up about it. Sure the front page says 'copyrighted material', you think they'd put the full legalese on the frontpage or just a blurb saying "Its Bad, mkay"?
But if anybody would take the time to actually *READ* the subject at hand, you would find this paragraph:
And even if you fail your appeal, you just lose your ResNet access, you can still use computer labs on campus.
Parent
Re:Lack of Caring (Score:5, Insightful)
We get riled up because of all the kneejerk reactions that create more problems than they solve. Sure, it might superficially seem ok, but the potential for abuse is so high, it's patently absurd.
Parent
Re:Lack of Caring (Score:4, Interesting)
One stupid moderation of a valid point gets your moderation privelidges removed forever.
But lets face it, if you were too stupid to make a valid poitn wouldnt you just hide behind the moderation system by using it to disagree with other people too?
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
"Don't download copywritten material." We're actually talking about copyrights, not copywriters (i.e. the guys who write advertisements). So I would have modded it down as "malapropism".
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The extent to which students should be downloading pirate content on a university residential network would make for an interesting discussion. I'd love to have that discussion at some point.
This story has nothing to do with that question though. This story is 100% about due process and appropriate penalties. Even if we assume that students should be downloading zero pirate content, the school IT department shou
Baby Meet Bathwater (Score:5, Insightful)
TFA mentions that Stanford and other schools charge high "Reconnection" fees after they block your MAC for sharing files. Why don't they just do something like that and make a load of money?
"Zero-tolerance" is all about moralism, and rarely about correcting behavior, or "teaching" people anything. It'll have a good effect statistically, but the people who get their privileges pulled won't have their attitude changed, they'll just conclude the "RIAA-Nazis" blackmailed his school into screwing with his education.
It doesn't matter how true it is, rules must give the appearance of fairness in order to be respected.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Saying "The measure changes statistics but not attitude" does not mean the measure is bad.
For example, if you have tough sentences for violent robbery, it won't change the attitude of the would-be robbers, just make them more afraid, and thus less robberies are committed.
Let's not get start on the whole "copyright infringement is not a crime" stuff, OK? Crime or no crime, it's something RIAA and co. want to root out. You can have an enti
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
We aren't talking about violent robbery, we're talking about copyright infringement. You can't equate a crime against intellectual property with violence. People who copy Content without paying for it are pretty far down the ladder of malfeasance, and spending a little effort to correct them might be worth it, compared to a violent felon. Most states don't depriv
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Baby Meet Bathwater (Score:5, Insightful)
Once you force someone into a corner, where the choice is "do something that you fear or die", they will choose to live, because they're more afraid of dying than of whatever you were going to do to them. In fact, the whole "overcoming fear" thing is how cave-men evolved into us. Oh, wait, you said Kansas
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
sounds crap (Score:3, Insightful)
Wouldn't all/most of these innocent things violate the DMCA? wouldn't that be enough to get you royally screwed?
How will they know? (Score:5, Interesting)
Even if they are 'guilty'.. what if someone downloaded a ROM of a NES game he has in his basement at home? A track from a CD that doesn't play anymore? A no-cd patch for a game so he can play it on his laptop wherever he goes? According to their draconian proposal, all of these would mean you are cut off from the internet.. forever. Is it me or is that f&*king crazy?
A University should be fighting the powers that be, not aiding and abetting them.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Incidentally, it also teaches, but that's in room 3b, which doesn't exist.
B.
Re: (Score:2)
No, might try reading [ku.edu] their policies [ku.edu] next time.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
the 11th commandment strikes again (Score:2)
Aehm, the blurb can't be right ... (Score:2)
If you are caught downloading copyrighted material, you will lose your ResNet privileges forever.
If i surf to any website, i start downloading copyrighted material, the moment i hit go. So it must read "downloading copyrighted material without permission of the copyright owner" and how on earth will this be enforced?
Implicit permission? Explicit permission?
How should Admin Eve know, that i phoned Alan Smithee in LA, and he gave me permission to download a 5 min .avi from his upcoming film "Gay Politicans go Hollywood" to include it in my essay about the corrupt politics in enforcing IP-Crimes?
Look
Typical Slashdot Sensationalism (Score:5, Informative)
Let's take a look shall we:
1) You get a notice
2) You get a 5 day suspension
3) You have those 5 business days to submit an appeal if it was erroneous
4) If your appeal is denied (or you didn't submit one) your ResNet access is terminated.
It's the end of the world . . . oh wait . .
So you lose your dorm access, but can walk down to a computer lab . . .
So I guess the moral of the story is, don't get caught, or don't use the schools network to download your movies
Re: (Score:3)
So, if I understand their system, the merest COMPLAINT will get you a suspension that will turn perma-ban if you don't appeal?
Simple, people (including students, since the source of the ban doesn't have to be particularly valid) can FLOOD the U with complaints and allegations. They don't have to be PROVEN, merely asserted. Don't like the people in that dorm? A couple of hours with a computer and printer
Did they think this through? (Score:5, Informative)
We've already seen that anyone outside the U.S can send a bogus DMCA takedown notice without penalty. Not often the US passes laws that prosecute Americans and give non-Americans free reign but there you go. Here are two recent cases showing how easy it is:
http://www.australianit.news.com.au/story/0,24897
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2007/pulpit_20
Now Kansas University has said they'll shut down students account if *anyone* sends a DMCA notice, with right of appeal. So if someone outside the US was to take the University's mailing list and generate a bogus DMCA notice for each one, the
entire University would voluntarily shut itself down. This hole in DMCA has been suggested before, so it's hardly new.
Who dreamed up this nonsense? Didn't they think it through to its logical conclusion? Don't Universities teach critical thinking? I mean, Double Duh.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Policy could affect research and study (Score:4, Interesting)
In my own work, I often have to fetch journal and conference papers from digital libraries, e.g. a good one [acm.org]. Often I will find a paper is not available to me because it isn't covered by my University's subscription, like many of the papers here [ieee.org] or here [springerlink.com]. That situation is supposed to force a trip to the brick-and-mortar library (if it has the document), but sometimes you can find the paper online anyway, using a search engine. It might be on the author's website or Citeseer [psu.edu]. Sometimes people seem to "accidentally" leave copies of papers where a search engine can find them. This is extremely helpful for a researcher, saving much time, and it is known that online articles are more likely to be cited [psu.edu].
However, except in special cases (e.g. the author has retained the copyright and distributed it for free), this is technically copyright infringement. The publishers want you to get everything through their paywall. That would be fine if everything was accessible, but the exhorbitant fees charged for full access by some organisations prevent that. Therefore, copyright infringement actually helps scientific research by allowing information to flow. At my University, nobody seems to notice (or care about) students digging up papers from elsewhere. But if the Kansas U management style spread here, a publisher could presumably get students instantly disconnected for "bypassing the paywall". You might lose your Internet connection -- for studying.
Is this close to a situation where research is actively inhibited by greed [gnu.org]?
"The content you requested is not part of your subscription, please pay $30 to download this 10 page article".
IT policy at U of Kansas is generally clueless (Score:4, Informative)
Two or three mistaken enforcements of this -- yes, that will happen with near certainty given past experience -- and the effect of this will be simply to drive students out of the dorms. Someone with an ounce of clue (necessarily, outside of ITS) will figure that it is a whole lot cheaper to stonewall the RIAA on most cases than to deal with the cost of empty rooms, the policy will be quietly dropped, and IT will go in search of something else they can screw up.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
But that's immaterial, anyhow, as you have NO idea if the other person is doing it legally or not. I don't stop everyone I see on the street and verify that they are not an escaped criminal before I let them continue down the sidewalk, right? Even if that's not my duty, a police officer doesn't do that, either. Just because someone COULD be doi
Too much credit to RMS and not enough to MIT. (Score:3, Informative)
Open Source Software owes at least as much to Berkeley's liberal attitude, *and* MIT's liberal attitude, as to RMS. RMS has effectively and unfairly demonized the AI lab, and he's been given too much credit for being one of the more visible rocks in an avala
Re: (Score:3, Funny)