College Student Sues Proctorio After Source Code Copyright Claim (theverge.com) 35
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has filed a lawsuit against the remote testing company Proctorio on behalf of Miami University student Erik Johnson. The Verge reports: The lawsuit is intended to "quash a campaign of harassment designed to undermine important concerns" about the company's remote test-proctoring software, according to the EFF. The lawsuit intends to address the company's behavior toward Johnson in September of last year. After Johnson found out that he'd need to use the software for two of his classes, Johnson dug into the source code of Proctorio's Chrome extension and made a lengthy Twitter thread criticizing its practices -- including links to excerpts of the source code, which he'd posted on Pastebin. Proctorio CEO Mike Olsen sent Johnson a direct message on Twitter requesting that he remove the code from Pastebin, according to screenshots viewed by The Verge. After Johnson refused, Proctorio filed a copyright takedown notice, and three of the tweets were removed. (They were reinstated after TechCrunch reported on the controversy.)
In its lawsuit, the EFF is arguing that Johnson made fair use of Proctorio's code and that the company's takedown "interfered with Johnson's First Amendment right." "Copyright holders should be held liable when they falsely accuse their critics of copyright infringement, especially when the goal is plainly to intimidate and undermine them," said EFF Staff Attorney Cara Gagliano in a statement. "I'm doing this to stand up against student surveillance, as well as abuses of copyright law," Johnson told The Verge. "This isn't the first, and won't be the last time a company abuses copyright law to try and make criticism more difficult. If nobody calls out this abuse of power now, it'll just keep happening."
In its lawsuit, the EFF is arguing that Johnson made fair use of Proctorio's code and that the company's takedown "interfered with Johnson's First Amendment right." "Copyright holders should be held liable when they falsely accuse their critics of copyright infringement, especially when the goal is plainly to intimidate and undermine them," said EFF Staff Attorney Cara Gagliano in a statement. "I'm doing this to stand up against student surveillance, as well as abuses of copyright law," Johnson told The Verge. "This isn't the first, and won't be the last time a company abuses copyright law to try and make criticism more difficult. If nobody calls out this abuse of power now, it'll just keep happening."
This post reminded me (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: This post reminded me (Score:1, Offtopic)
From me they will not have a cent, not anymore. I actually feel shame to have donated money to them in the past, a mistake i do not intend to repeat.
https://www.eff.org/it/deeplin... [eff.org]
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
I had mod points yesterday.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: This post reminded me (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
"I am very badass" - BAReFO0t
It's a freakin agrument, you moderatrolls! (Score:2)
Learn what a hyperbole is, for fuck's sake!
And yes, I am more badass than you, armchair farters of Generation Pussy. Which is a bar so high, I'm not good enough at limbo to not pass above. :P
Got a problem with that?
A reminder for organizations (Score:2)
Another reminder of something I learned long ago:
If your organization is devoted to doing something important, something truly valuable, avoid the temptation to wade into unrelated controversial issues *as an organization*.
Individuals members may of course make their voices heard on any topic, but for the organization, as an organization, to declare a position on unrelated controversies leaves behind many of those who had been supporting your important work.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Naziism is not a controversial issue.
Re: This post reminded me (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Don't they lose most of their lawsuits?
Re: (Score:2)
Excerpts for commentary. (Score:4, Insightful)
Sounds a bit like when a news organization takes excerpts of another work for the sake of critique or commentary.
Re:Excerpts for commentary. (Score:4, Insightful)
state school = full First Amendment rights (Score:5, Insightful)
and they can't use an 3rd party with an EULA to take them away.
Re: (Score:2)
You do realize that the First Amendment applies to the Federal government (of the US).
State run schools are governed by the constitution of the state they are in.
State run schools aren't any more beholden to the First Amendment than a privately run school is.
Re: (Score:2)
after that "unpleasantness" in the 1860s, the Fourteenth Amendment was passed.
A century and a half of caselaw holds that portions of the Bill of Rights that are fundamental to the concept of ordered liberty *do* bind the states through the XIVth . . .
Take this to completion. (Score:4, Insightful)
Am I the only one... (Score:4, Insightful)
who googles photos of people like Proctorio CEO Mike Olsen [google.com] after reading about them in the news because you wonder if people who are assholes somehow look different than the rest of us?
Re: (Score:2)
Makes no sense (Score:4, Insightful)
Time to go after Twitter as well? (Score:2)
Jack is always too eager to take down anytime immediately whenever some company shouts 'Copyright infringement!!!!1!'.
The DMCA requires that twitter do that. (Score:3)
It doesn't permit the service to investigate and decide whether the notice is valid, they have to act on it and take down the content. It is then up to the person who posted the content to make a statement that says, "Yes, it is valid, These is my real identity and my contact details, tell them to
They literally send the source code to anyone ... (Score:4, Interesting)
... who requests it, for free.
Just send a HTTP GET, and you get it.
The concept of a "copyright" claim by letting others see it, is even more ridiculous than imaginary property schemes usually are.
Re:They literally send the source code to anyone . (Score:4, Informative)
And open-source lets others see it. Doesn't mean the GPL is invalid.
Re:They literally send the source code to anyone . (Score:4, Informative)
Not that I want to defend these asshats, but simply giving something away for free doesn't invalidate the copyright on it. You can give away a newspaper or broadcast a song for free, but it retains copyright protection.
Fair use = copyright infringement (Score:1)
Interesting case ... (Score:2)
Under German copyright law (Urheberrecht) this would be a violation.
We have no "fair use clauses".
No idea in this situation. To bad the summary does not mention what is exactly meant with "criticizing its practices".