Teacher Fired for P2P Lecture 749
An anonymous reader writes "A teacher at the Polytechnic University of Valencia, Spain, was forced to resign after a talk about P2P networks. You can read his side of the story on his blog." From the article: "The day before the conference, the Dean (pressured by the Spanish Recording Industry Association 'Promusicae' as I found out later, and he recognized himself in a quote to the national newspaper El Pais, and even the Motion Picture Association of America, as another newspaper quotes) tried to stop it by denying permission to use the scheduled venue. So I scheduled a second one, and that was denied again. And a third time. Finally I gave the conference on the university cafeteria, for 5 hours, in front of 150 people." Commentary on this story at BoingBoing as well.
To make the lecture worth it... (Score:4, Insightful)
How are you going to suppress a n^x communication growth curve?
Re:To make the lecture worth it... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:To make the lecture worth it... (Score:5, Funny)
Just as you should have preceded your comment with "I'll probably get modded down for this..." in order to get moderated higher.
He's in the Slashdot's Front Page now (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:To make the lecture worth it... (Score:5, Informative)
The fact is that as a result he's got a real lot of publicity. And now he is on tour like a rock-star, LOL.
The situation is Spain is somewhat different as in the rest of the world:
We have a monster called SGAE:
It's kinda mixture of trade union, governmental department and private enterprise (?), which acts as a lobby group for EMI-Odeon Spain, as an obligatory trade-union (authors must pay fees to them so that they can see a cent from their IP), does music production as a private enterprise (it's partly responsible for the infamous "Latin Grammies"), fights against piracy, pirates copyrighted stuff from the spanish Wikipedia and at the same time runs an online music store, lobbys for non-related stuff such as an internet driving license and gets fees for public broadcast of public television and music bands which are not members of the SGAE.
MPAA should be concerned, as those guys also get payd for the IP of "unknown" artists, this means anybody which is potentially non-spaniard.
Now they are even getting money from a blank media 'tax' (30% of a CD or DVD's price), a 'tax' which is paid even by the Spanish administration itself (!)
So, we Spaniards can be cosidered a dumb bunch, but in matters of robbery and piracy those guys are Number One.
Re:To make the lecture worth it... (Score:3, Insightful)
"Driving License" (Score:3, Informative)
( We seem to be getting somewhere, in Norway at least "Datakortet" - the "Computer Card" - can be obtained using Linux
Re:To make the lecture worth it... (Score:4, Interesting)
They get a fee from the authors as their legal representants and also get fees from the customer who would like to use these rights. Finally they get a percentage of the IP earnings (of record sales and repertoire use in broadcasts and live shows). A big byte of the IP income belongs to 'unknown authors': this means that as long as the author is not there to be paid for his/her IP it's the SGAE which cashes this money. I can remember that the percentage was near 3-10% of the total amount, which is a lot of money anyway, tens of thausands of Euro-bucks which go into no-one-knows who's pockets. So that every foreign artist which sells music in Spain or is being braodcast in the Spanish media will not see a cent if her record company doesn't has an agreement with the SGAE. This counts for almost any smaller indy or single artist as we are normally talking about bulk agreements with big US companies. There have already been two cases of the German record industry against the SGAE (the weirdness has no end, sorry for your brains). To keep it simple: They get money from all and every IP transaction related to music, theater and other media which occurs inside the Spanish territory. And they also has subsidiaries in South America and the USA...
The blank-media 'tax' is indeed a fee for permitting the private copy of IPed stuff, the result is divided among the SGAE itself and the companies with which they have an agreement. As it is indeed a tax on IP, there are also evading payment of all those whose IP is being used and are 'unknown' to the SGAE. This not only involves musicians, but also the software industry in all its forms, from Free Software, where users have to pay for the media to burn an ISO of her favorite distro, to propietary software as they are also charging for the media used to store backup copies and data.
It's very very difficult to try to explain to a stranger how this madhouse really works and why those guys are doing their will instead of being in jail.
If you are wondering why we Spaniards aren't storming the streets armed to the teeth right now and shooting those bastard politicians and lobbysts back to hell, the only thing I can tell you is "me too"...
And Internet Driving Licence?
Nop, I wasn't joking at all, here's the link: Spanish: P. Farré demands the end of intenet anonymity [elsemanaldigital.com]
This guys is the second-in-charge in the SGAE, a really smart guy, as you can imagine, who seems to think the internet only exists in Spain.
Techinical Point (Score:3, Informative)
Um (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Um (Score:5, Insightful)
They get pulled into a quiet room and told all would be best if they left the university.
Then they "resign", but it's tenamount to firing.
-nB
Re:Um (Score:3, Informative)
And if they do something that is not leagally wrong, but pisses off any possible source of funding for the university, then what? They get pulled into a quiet room and told all would be best if they left the university. Then they "resign", but it's tenamount to firing.
Umm, no. At least here in the US, if the professor has tenure they say "Fuck you" and go directly to the faculty senate to stir up some shit. If the university tries to actually get rid of them chances are the faculty will call a no c
Re:Um (Score:5, Informative)
Second, most new professors are years away from tenure.
Now, even for tenured professors at US schools, tenure isn't quite the shield you describe. For instance, if the professor is in a profit-center department (otherwise known as biology, computer science, or one of the other funded areas), if the professor isn't pulling in sufficient grants, the university can put them in a broom-closet like space where it's unlikely that they'll have the lab facilities to put together successful proposals (in biology, for instance, you usually need to have done most of the research before putting in funding -- grants are that competitive and agencies that risk averse).
Now, let's say that being put in a broom closet isn't bad enough. The university can get rid of tenured professors by eliminating the department.
Here's an example (not of retribution against tenured professsors, but simply of how a department closing can lead to selective firing of tenured professors). In 1990, Brandeis University had a linguistics department with 6 faculty, and I believe all six had tenure. The university decided to close the department to save money (at the time, the school was eating its endowment, not just interest on the money).
The university then made offers to 3 of the 6 professors (including Ray Jackendoff) to join other departments.
Effectively, 3 tenured professors were fired.
--Pat
Re:Um (Score:5, Interesting)
I was just reading an old Chronicle article yesterday about a similar case. (Threw it away afterwards, so I can't give you details since I've forgotten.) The university decided to get rid of two tenured professors by doing pretty much what you said- remove all their classes, get rid of their office, etc, even if they weren't fired.
The end result after a settlement- the professors won't be there anymore, but they're going to get paid for the rest of the time to their retirement. The faculty senate had a unanimous no confidence vote for the president and administration over the issue, followed by an overwhelming no confidence vote from the full faculty. The president is very unlikely to be there next year.
Tenure's not a perfect shield, but administrators mess with it at their own risk.
Re:Um (Score:3, Informative)
And those taxpayers are not specially fond of the SGAE / Promiscae, as they fees us for buying bunrable CD's for storing our pictures and also fees bars and the like for having a TV set, radio or HiFi equipment. Even when the spanish TV stations are either public or earns their income from publicity We are paying IP for TV Commarcials!
And the funniest of all this is that it's not the
TV stations which recei
Re:Um (Score:3, Insightful)
In the rest of the world the authors are not forced to be member of an organization to be able to get paid.
In the rest of the world authors and music industry are not members of the same institution
In the rest of the world such a private company would not be albe to tax consumers, neither they would be legally considered a non-profit organization.
Think about the MPAA doing all it's lobbying and bullying, plus having the status of an obligatory trade union for musicians, plus being vice-presi
Re:Um (Score:5, Insightful)
I dunno, but I'd guess someone who can't spell "tantamount" doesn't have a lot of experience of working in a university.
An inability to spell some words correctly, or being dyslexic, does not indicate that someone is incapable of having a good argument. Nor does it indicate that he's making things up.
Even if it did, you should make allowance for the fact that in an international forum the poster could be working in his second language.
And as I seem to be the only poster here that has actually read the article, I'll quote the relevant passage:
He says that this is why he resigned, which I would say is tantamount to being fired.
Re:Um (Score:3, Insightful)
That you believe the researcher in question actually was formally fired, but is not telling the truth about it?
Or that he was either fired or pressured to resign, but may be misrepresenting the reason?
Or that you are so affronted by the original poster's misspellings that you are going to take issue with anything he says or anyone else says in response to him?
By the way, I concur with others that it is poor form to mock others for their
Re:Um (Score:4, Funny)
There wouldn't be any staff left if that rule were enforced.
Contract non renewal (Score:3, Interesting)
A nice clean agreable break isn't a bad thing.
Re:Techinical Point (Score:5, Funny)
Being pressured, however, may have have had something to do with it.
- The Word Police
Re:Techinical Point (Score:3, Interesting)
Of course, we should be very concerned about the allegations. If true they represent a serious breach of academic freedom. If the researcher is crying wolf, then, deservedly, his career is at an end.
It's a bit curious though. If we take his story at face value, he resigned rather than face the various nasty things a hostile dean could do to his life. On the other hand, he clearly means to fi
Re:Techinical Point (Score:5, Funny)
I don't get it (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I don't get it (Score:5, Informative)
It's not, and it was never suggested that it was. What was suggested was that his lecture was so disliked by individuals in power, because they don't want people to get the idea that P2P systems have legitimate uses, that he was coerced into resigning. The penalty for not resigning would have been a total crackdown on his entire department. He chose to resign to save the department that pain. And in return for that "favor", his 5 years of teaching is not even being recognized.
and why was he forbidden in the first place?
See above. The university administration, under coercion by the Spanish Recording Industry Association and the MPAA (I think-- I didn't quite understand that bit), didn't want the population at large to see that P2P is a valid and legal tool, as that would damage their fight against piracy.
Re:I don't get it (Score:3, Informative)
It's true! (Score:5, Funny)
hawk
Re:I don't get it (Score:5, Insightful)
CRIMINALIZED prostitution makes pimps and slaves, not legalized prostitution. Not to mention impoverished prostitutes. The emotional damage is caused by pimps, johns who can't be found or charged, police that don't care, and the fact that the women are de facto slaves with no escape route.
Legalized prostitution, done right, eliminates pimps, who exist outside the law, makes prostitutes rich, if they handle the money right, and empowers the woman rather than enslaves her, because she's a volunteer, being highly paid, rather than a chained and abused slave.
The major reason why women couldn't sell sex legally in our history is this: they'd be rich and independent, and that was NOT to be allowed by men, period. After all, they are the sole providers of a highly valued commodity.
Illegal prostitution gave men the ability to take the women's money away, in one form or another: by artificially lowering the price, by inserting male middlemen who could use their physical or political power to take a huge cut, and turning the business into a slave market.
Re:I don't get it (Score:3, Insightful)
We're talking at cross-purposes so there's no disagreement - just misunderstanding. I fully agree that if sex for sale caused a betrayal then there was something wrong to begin with. I was a little harsh in implying that men will always cheat given the opportunity.
What I was trying to do was determine why prostitutes were held in contempt and I disagreed with the original poster that it was because men didn't want women to be rich and independent. I think a lot of the cultural dislike of prostitutes was
Re:I don't get it (Score:3, Informative)
You seem to be under the impression that P2P software is illegal. It is not. The teacher was giving a demonstration of and a lecture on the legality of P2P networks. It was this subject that meant his lecture was prevented three times.
I agree it would be good to read a response from the University, hopefully we will get one. However, you should have at least read his story - he wasn't endorsing illegal activity - he was presenting an argument that P2P networking was legal (and he is right, actually).
Not fair... (Score:2)
Developer, developer, developer....
Cartel Coffin (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Cartel Coffin (Score:2, Funny)
Someone's at the door, be right back.
This time they've gone too far. (Score:5, Insightful)
This guy goes out to talk about the legal uses of P2P networks, and the recording industry gets him fired. How exactly do they expect to convince people to buy their products rather than downloading them, if they do this sort of thing?
Re:This time they've gone too far. (Score:5, Insightful)
What they are doing is down-right vile, but disagreeing with corporate practices doesn't justify theft (obtaining something without proper payment).
They don't have to convince anyone of anything, because they are the legal owners of the content. And since that content is by no means essential to your life in any way shape or form, they can control it as they like.
Don't like how someone does business? Don't like their tactics? Boycott, get others to boycott... Protest... Write angry letters about it... whatever, but you can't really use it as a justification for theft.
I think the University in this case is a lot more at fault, because the industry could try and pressure or threaten audits or whatever, but they should have stood up to it. If I was in the administration I would have recorded every bit of communication with the industry groups and would have said "You even TRY to nail us for exercising our academic freedoms, this will go out all over every major media outlet and we'll make sure to take you to court over it"
Re:This time they've gone too far. (Score:3, Insightful)
"What they are doing is down-right vile, but disagreeing with corporate practices doesn't justify theft (obtaining something without proper payment)."
OH NO i am depriving some company of PERCIEVED LOSSES. stop being a tool. i guess if i watch a dvd at my friends house i have to go out and buy another copy right? otherwise its stealing via public performance. right?
boycotts and angry letters do a whole lotta nothing when the side you are fighting is evil. they will stop at nothign t
Re:This time they've gone too far. (Score:5, Insightful)
Copyright infringement is not theft. They are legally two different things. One is copying an abstract idea while the other involves taking physical property. Copyright infringement is a civil action in most jurisdictions and most circumstances. Theft is a criminal action.
There is some definate problems with how Copyright is being handled lately. This going to be an even bigger problem in the future. For one example of the problems we will be facing, check out Kim Stanley Robinson's "Elephant's Memory". To summarise the issue- there is a finite number of combinations that make up a particular art form. With the never ending copyright durations, there is a dwindling supply of new combinations to create new works of art. How do you create a new song when every five note chord you might come up with is already copyrighted?
By ignoring copyright now, we force things to be changed. Look how Napster has given rise to various legal and semilegal digital music distribution services. Do you really think there would have been an iTunes or iPods if there was no Napster?
Re:This time they've gone too far. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:This time they've gone too far. (Score:3, Insightful)
It's not theft at all. You've been brainwashed into thinking that. Theft requires that you take someone's possession away and deny them access to that. It's not piracy either. That requires theft, rape and pillage on the high seas.
What copying music does is increase its availability without compensating the record industry. They lose revenue. Never mind that you weren't going to buy it in the first place, you've devalued its worth to the record c
Re:This time they've gone too far. (Score:3, Insightful)
I think of this issue like people who don't eat meat because of moral reasons. Discounting the fanatics, they don't go out and steal the cows away so they can be treated better.
Re:This time they've gone too far. (Score:5, Insightful)
The game is *fixed*, and you can't win playing a fixed game.
Re:This time they've gone too far. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:This time they've gone too far. (Score:3, Insightful)
If Slashdotters are unhappy with the way copyright law works, they need to work to change copyright law-- NOT simply pirate the products they want anyway which 1) doesn't accomplish anything because the lawmakers will never hear the Slashdotter's side fo the story and 2) changes you from a 'protestor' to a 'criminal.' (And yes, you're a 'criminal' regardless of how immoral you think the law is.)
I'm
Re:This time they've gone too far. (Score:5, Insightful)
You present the choices as
1) STFU and Obey The law
2) Change the law through the accepted channels for doing so
3) Violate the law
and suggest 3) is undesirable. But because 2) is impossible, by opposing 3) you're supporting 1).
Re:This time they've gone too far. (Score:5, Insightful)
It's this defeatist attitude that makes your prophecy of being unable to fix things self-fulfilling.
Re:This time they've gone too far. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:This time they've gone too far. (Score:5, Insightful)
The law won't be changed by any means that is within the reasonable capacities of the average Slashdotter. The majority of us have no political authority or influence. At all. I write letters to Orin Hatch every year, and sure enough, every year he turns around and tells everyone that my state is very supportive of putting a death penalty on owning an mp3 player. I vote in every presidential election, and every time the presidential candidate whom I voted for ends up with 0 votes *total*. (Which is why I like to slap people who say "Every Vote Counts!")
However, there are other ways to fight stupid and immoral laws, and one of them is to make sure they're unenforceable. Sure, that won't fix the law, but will fix it's effects and it's our only option. That's why the P2P arms race took place to begin with. We have no political authority, but we have a lot of combined technical knowhow.
Anybody knows that you don't win a battle by fighting the enemy where he is the strongest. Legislators have no reason to listen to us. They have hundreds of thousands of crisp, green reasons to listen to the **AA-holes. Lobbyists get paid handsome salaries to push their rhetoric 7 days a week for years at a time. We'd have to finance it out of our own pocket. Can you afford to take three straight years off and lobby for what you think is fair?
However, we control our own computers. Therefore, if we fight a war of software, the advantage goes to us. That's why they fight with more assheaded draconian laws whereas we fight with more robust and untrackable P2P apps. Sure, they sometimes try to write P2P tracking applications to find filesharers, and we sometimes write letters to our congresscowards. Neither one makes any appreciable dent. Each of us, therefore, tries to pull the battlefield closer to our respective power bases--we try to ensure they can't find filesharers to prosecute by making sure it's as big of a pain in the ass as possible, whereas they try to ensure they can find them by pushing laws that ensure they can demand any info they want out of ISPs at the drop of a hat.
What it comes down to is the same thing you've heard a million times before. Many people do not consider copyright infringement to be wrong. I know I don't. I think the whole concept is assheaded and there's abundant proof that every statement they make in defense of it is wrong at this point, ESPECIALLY in the entertainment industry. Likewise, there's people like you who swear up and down that it's theft. And since we cannot agree to disagree and just ignore each other, we fight.
Re:This time they've gone too far. (Score:3, Interesting)
That's my exact point. You're not going to convince people that something needs to change by simply fulfilling your every whim and operating as if the law simply didn't exist. You know, other people who had important issues found sensible non-violent ways of bringing them to attention, and they changed the world!
Martin Luthor King Jr, and Mohatma Ghandi would protest this issue by organi
Re:This time they've gone too far. (Score:3)
Re:This time they've gone too far. (Score:4, Insightful)
The problem is that theft does have an actual meaning, and in every definition, it implies someone losing something.
The act of theft has two consequences: 1- the owner loses his property, and 2- the thieve gains some property he didn't own.
If 2- doesn't happen, then it's not theft.
If, for example, I go to your house and break all your windows, then, 1- follows, you lost your property (the windows), but 2- doesn't, because I gained nothing. Then I would not be a thieve, I would be a mad man that breaks windows, a window destroyer, an aggresor, or I don't know what.
If 1- doesn't happen, then it's not theft.
If I go to a river, and get a bucket of water, then I haven't paid for it. I now own the water, and I didn't pay. 2- did happen, and 1- didn't.
Then I am not a thieve.
There's no way you can define theft as "gaining property without paying", without being inconsistent with the world, and outlawing most things that people do, like breathing.
Plus, I won't start talking about capitalism, and how your statement only applies in a consumers society, but the concept theft applies in any society, other than real socialism.
The real issue here is cloning. When you make a copy, 2- happens, but 1- doesn't.
You can talk about lost revenue, but lots of things we do make companies lose revenue, and they don't sue us in result.
Resigned != Fired (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm not trying to say what happened was at all right, but it does not help the argument to start stories with the claim that he was fired. Fudging the little facts to get attention always in the long run will be held against you, and your side will not be taken as seriously.
Also, one should remember that this teacher was not approved to give the lecture and decided to go without permission and give it in the cafeteria. This would be grounds for inspecting someones future at most companies/universities.
Once again, I think what happened was a shame, but I also think that ignoring these facts is just unacceptable.
No courage, No freedom (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Resigned != Fired (Score:5, Funny)
Academia != Business (Score:5, Insightful)
Also, one should remember that this teacher was not approved to give the lecture and decided to go without permission and give it in the cafeteria. This would be grounds for inspecting someones future at most companies/universities.
At companies, yes. At universities, no.
In academia, knowledge moves forward as we argue for competing viewpoints. Universities can't function properly unless it's possible to argue for unpopular viewpoints without fear of reprisal. This is one of the major differences between academia and the business world.
I'm a faculty member myself. If I choose to stand up in a cafeteria and speak my mind on any subject I please, that is my right. I'm not required or expected to obtain anybody's approval or permission. The rules are that I can't be fired for this. If you disagree with my viewpoint, then the correct response is to use your own freedom to state your dissent.
Most folks in academia, both faculty and administration, understand this, agree with it strongly as a value, and go to considerable lengths to safeguard this ability. Those safeguards grossly broke down in this case.
Re:Academia != Business (Score:5, Insightful)
Both sides? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Both sides? (Score:5, Insightful)
unlawful firing? (Score:2)
I dont get that... resigned to protect the boss that bent to the movie guys wishes, and the 'other masters program guys'. What danger were they in???
hmm... of course we're in america, i wonder if he still has a alwsuit over there, since we have 50 for that sort of case.
Which just goes to show that... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Which just goes to show that... (Score:5, Funny)
so I scheduled a second one, and that was denied again. And a third time.
--AC
And yet some big corporations are working with P2P (Score:5, Interesting)
Certain uses of P2P technology, which involves sharing of copywrited material is indeed illegal. However, there is nothing illegal about P2P technology in and of itself.
There are large corporations out there that are working to build legitimate P2P applications [slashdot.org] for the benefit of the general public.
Where's the disconnect?
Re:And yet some big corporations are working with (Score:3, Funny)
If he'd been a tenured professor (Score:4, Interesting)
I hope there's an investigation into the outside pressure:
Either there is reason for department to be audited or it shouldn't be, but the topics of discussion in the lectures should NOT be a determining factor, and his resignation should NOT change whether or not any audits proceed. The fact that his resignation changed that outcome means it's political, and as such there needs to be an investigation, so this kind of thing doesn't happen again.
Moneyed interests (Score:3, Informative)
Pressured? (Score:3, Interesting)
Who was applying pressure to the Dean, and how? And why does giving a talk to 150 people justify this level of pressure?
It sounds more like a tinfoil hat conspiracy where the Dean had his own reasons for doing what he did, but I'm not convinced the media cartels had anything to do with it.
Re:Pressured? (Score:3, Interesting)
I think you don't really know how much power the SGAE has here (RIAA equivalent). They, a private organization,
No FS Here (Score:3, Insightful)
All this talk about not being fired... (Score:5, Insightful)
However, I do agree with some people that it would have been a clearer argument if he waited longer for the situation to develop more and made proper recordings of phone calls "discussing his problematic situation".
Something I don't get... (Score:3, Funny)
Mods: "he resigned, not fired" == troll (Score:5, Informative)
Mods, please mark "Troll" to anyone who posts anything like:
"He's a wuss, he backed down and quit."
or
"He resigned, he didn't get fired. TFA != Story Title"
Half-truth: He resigned.
Complete truth: He was forced to resign, and denounced by the university. The university said, "he only taught a few classes," when he'd been teaching full-time for 5 years!
This is BS, and censorship at its worst. I'm working on becoming a Computer Science professor, and this article makes me glad I don't live in Spain. Does anyone remember this [slashdot.org] from a few weeks ago? The RIAA wants just as much control over U.S. universities as the Spanish equivalent already has over theirs.
Re:Open Source full time! (Score:3, Insightful)
I teach my students to use P2P. (Score:5, Interesting)
I see it as a personal obligation to get people to use P2P, especially the ones that are scared of it. Now, I don't publicly encourage them to violate copyright in the sense that I direct them to sites like eTree and Knoppix, but I do use class time to teach them how to set up BitTorrent to work with TOR and discuss the merits of clients like Mute and GNUnet.
To me, this is just following the trend. The RIAA, MPAA and BSA are all into encouraging shools to spend more time on the topic of intellectual property so teachers should feel obliged to take them up on it and use class time to discuss these topics at length.
I think schools should spend a whole day each week doing nothing but discussing P2P and exchanging examples of the right way to share. The more time devoted to the topic, the better.
For CS students (Score:5, Interesting)
I know the class below me at Edinburgh Uni had a project which involved writing thier own P2P app.
P2P Apps are a great learning experience in socket programming, distributed systems, threading and many other skills that do transfer into other areas.
However if this stuff doesn't relate to your major then i fail to see why it should be taught. Regardless of how paradigm-shifting some people think p2p is - it's just a new way to use an old technology. And unless you study CS, Law, or some relevant social science then it's not what you (or your government) are paying for you to go to uni for.
The point here is that he was CENSORED (Score:5, Insightful)
Spain != U.S. (Score:5, Insightful)
There's a lot of comments here about how he should have gotten tenure, spoke to a union, in the U.S pressured resignation == firing, in the U.S. pressured resignation != firing, etc. How about someone from Spain actually chiming in? Is there a tenure system in Spanish universities? Teacher's union?
Freedom of speech in Spain (Score:5, Informative)
Politicians here sometimes sue members of the public for slander or libel. The last president did it (aznar). I like the UK, where you can happily calll tony blair a liar and not worry he's going to try to sue you for it!
Re:Freedom of speech in Spain (Score:3, Informative)
Um, actually, there are very few countries in the EU with any guaranteed freedom of expression. Certainly not the UK or Ireland anyway.
The difference is usually that public figures can't be bothered taking libel suits against normal plebs, simply because a) it's so expensive, and b) the plebs don't have a whole lot of influence.
It's quite amusing to hear local scumbags being arrested asking
Re:Freedom of speech in Spain (Score:3, Informative)
You and I can call Blair a liar all we want and it won't do much to affect his reputation. Almost by definition, in order to defame someone what you say must have an effect, and British judges are quick to take the fact that there are differences in what effect different people and different forms of media will have when considering a defamantion lawsuit.
Besides, if Tony Blair sued, there's always th
Academic freedom ? (Score:3, Insightful)
Physics professors routinely give lectures that are, essentially, instructions for making a nuclear weapon. Chemistry professors often teach how to create the energetic reactions that most people call explosions. Engineering professors teach the methods that can cause buildings to fall down. No one suggests that these topics must not be taught. Indeed, there is significant intellectual content in each of these topics. Nuclear power, how to avoid explosions, and how to avoid falling buildings, all require knowledge that might be misused.
The idea of a p2p network is useful for many purposes other than distribution of copyrighted material. Distribution of public-domain materials, software upgrades and patches, government documents, and contributed materials are all legitimate. The protocols and technology that are used in current p2p implementations is a legitimate topic of study, so that researchers can design improved versions for future use. Methods to discover and disable the illegal copying of copyright material, without disabling the legal publishing of contributed public-domain material, is another legitimate area for research.
Of course, it is possible that some of the people attending these lectures had the intention of using the material to violate the law. But, it is also possible that some of the students who take physics, chemistry, or engineering courses have the intention of using that material to violate other laws. If we suppress every topic that might be used to do harm, there will not be much left in our universities.
Software license audits (Score:5, Insightful)
Also interesting, the teacher was only going to share his opinion on why using P2P may be legal. In America at least we are generally pretty protective of the right to debate ideas. The MPAA and its spanish counterparts though appear to be opposed to this concept.
If you're going to be an academic institution it would seem prudent to move away from software and support of groups that are unwilling to even allow different opinions to be expressed on a college compus about a topic. We used to call that type of exchange education.
Re:In America (Score:3, Insightful)
That is a perfect example of the point being made. You can say just about anything here, no matter how loony or (in this case) unpatriotic. You might be called a traitor for speaking out against the war, but you will not be prosecuted as one.
This is not an example of suppression of distasteful speech; it's an example of its exercise.
Re:In America (Score:3, Insightful)
You might be fired from your job, denied permits and licenses, and be harassed short of prosecution, and otherwise persecuted for it. No, you can't be prosecuted, but so long as the non-judicial punishment is under the radar that's just fne.
I tried a slightly different approach (Score:5, Interesting)
"Mr. Highgate, is sharing music files on the Internet wrong?"
"Well, students, it's illegal. And, according to the recording industry of America, it takes money away from recording artists."
"Yes, but is it wrong?"
"Let me tell you about the business practices of the recording industry . .
"Is it wrong?" I concluded. "Well, student's, that's a moral decision you'll have to make on your own. This is a civics class. All I'm going to tell you is that it's not legal, and you'd be insanely stupid to do it using the school's computers."
Though if anyone in the administration told me not to discuss this topic, I would probably comply. Just because I don't like the RIAA doesn't mean I'd be willing to martyr myself for it.
Re:I tried a slightly different approach (Score:5, Interesting)
Certainly not, providing you have the permission of the copyright owner to do so.
Only after their next question (presumed to be, "what if you don't have that permission?"), do you then get into the 40 minute talk on the state of the mainstream music industry. You could even point out to the musically inclined that it doesn't have to be that way - that they have the right and power to control their creations unless they sign them away to a delegatee of the Big 5.
Structuring the topic that way changes the conversation quite a bit.
Re:from the faux-news dept. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:from the faux-news dept. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:from the faux-news dept. (Score:3, Interesting)
but the end result is NOT the same (at least in the business world). severance packages are often very different (nonexistent in firing). being allowed to resign is much better...
Re:from the faux-news dept. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:from the faux-news dept. (Score:5, Informative)
No, the firing is NOT legitimate (Score:5, Insightful)
The proud history of universities is that they are supposed to be places for the sharing of information, not places for censorship. A university is generally considered to be part of a public trust of information, unlike a privately held for profit corporation. The charter of a university is usually not-for-profit and to spread and increase knowledge.
Good universities have professors who say scandalous things and - if they are well thought out - keep their jobs (usually unless they are personally attacking more senior faculty). By going ahead and getting forced to resign, I believe he did exactly what he intended - proved his university isn't interested in education and doesn't deserve to exist. (Unless of course they come back and remedy it)
Furthermore it is part of the mandate of a professor to do things like this - they are supposed to be making the world a better place, and they have a burden to that - the same way a doctor is supposed to help people even if they work for a corporation. They have BOTH responsibilities.
Re:No, the firing is NOT legitimate (Score:4, Interesting)
Bahahahahahahahahahahahaha! Oh man. *wipes tear from eye* *snickler* Pmmffff. I can't help it. Bahahahahahahahahahah HA!
Universities.... sharing information and ideas....no censorship....
Bahahahahahahahaha!
Oh man. Sorry. Eh heeee! Have you ever been to a university? And even more important, have you ever been part of the faculty at one? There is a conformity and monotony of thought presence that defies description. And if you dare to not subscribe to university groupthink, you may as well resign because you're never going to get anywhere. You hold your cards close to your chest at any American university unless you are willing to completely dedicate yourself to the accepted philosophy.
It's not as bad for the students, there's a lot of heterogeneity in terms of ideas among students, but it's alarmingly absent in faculty, and those who express political, social, or philosophical ideas outside of the accepted thinking are run out of town. And god forbid you say anything publically, they'll be demanding your resignation for "embarassing" the university with your extremist views.
Note: this is not a neocon rant about leftists in school. You can express leftist ideas that aren't the right leftist ideas and still get blasted. One of the great ironies of American academia is that the people running it are probably among the most markedly anti-establishment and anti-authoritarian as educated people can be, and yet they fiercely defend the power heirarchy in place. It's unreal.
It matters! (Score:4, Insightful)
Actually, it does matter. Most western societies consider colleges and universities to be places where the exchange of ideas should be paramount. Any censorship in this regard should be cause for great concern.
Many are pointing out that this guy was not a professor, so what's the big deal? The answer is that this was in connection to a discussion about IP law. If they can't discuss the specifics of the applications of technology, then what are they there for? Shall we wait for an exalted professor to get chastised for saying the same thing before we get worked up over this?
No, this is not good news...
Re:from the faux-news dept. (Score:3, Interesting)
The next thing I'd do is consult with an employment lawyer. Then, if my lawyer advised to me resign, I probably would. However, if my lawyer pointed out that firing the entire department would
a) leave the University short of crucial teaching staff d
Re:from the faux-news dept. (Score:4, Interesting)
- A CNN VP
- News Producers/Executive Producers at (at least) two of the major networks
- Various well-known journalists at the national level
- Various local well-known journalists (who I met years before I moved into this area)
If some employer tried to screw me like that, you can bet the excrement would hit the oscillating unit, if you know what I mean. If you don't have at least phone numbers of two or three reporters somewhere at your disposal... well, you're probably normal.Re:People are pussies. (Score:3, Insightful)
Sometimes its better to wait to make your case...
Spending the next 6 months in prison to make your point ( or dead ) even if you are right, isn't cool. Especially when postponing your 'statement' a little will keep you outside.
Proper timing is everything. Especially when you have a life to lead, and a family to support.
And in this case he's getting his word out, and saved his financial butt in t
Re:People are pussies. (Score:5, Interesting)
First, it would have cost the university a software audit. "Who cares?" you say. This would undoubtedly turn up something on someone's machine that was illegal, and the university would be fined. Then the university would make damn sure that this guy never worked anywhere in academia ever again.
So, if you are prepared to deal with this sort of thing, it's not a big deal. Stand up for your rights. But, unless you want to lose your job anyway and then not get hired elsewhere, it's best to resign.
Unfortunately, as previous posters have noted, that's the way it works in academia.
Re:Two points: (Score:5, Insightful)
Better yet (Score:5, Funny)
Relase it via bittorrent. Nothing like using a P2P network to prove the point.
Re:Nice Spin (Score:4, Insightful)
Apparently you cannot see the bigger picture:
The issue is:
What motivation did the administration have to have "wishes" of that nature? Do you really think it was the administration alone? No, the administration was affected by an external force - the M.A.F.I.A. (See other posts in this topic for what that means).
As the administrations true onus is to provide an environment for learning, and not just to learn those OfficiallyApproved(TM) topics, but anything that would advance human knowledge, then the administration was acting against it's own charter.
Quit spouting the line of the true conformist.
[If] You don't start fighting for your freedom, you're not going to have much left.
See it by yourself (Score:5, Informative)
You can see some photos of the people here [polinux.upv.es] .