The Next Generation Of Anti-Piracy Legislation Goes To School
from the beware-the-precedents-you-set dept
As discussed a few months ago by Tom Lee, misguided anti-piracy requirements for universities found their way into the College Opportunity and Affordability Act of 2007. Mostly, the nearly 800-page bill rehashes existing legislation regarding federal financial aid. However, a section titled "Campus-based Digital Theft Prevention" provides an unfortunate glimpse at what could be the new wave of legislation related to network filtering of copyrighted material inside and outside the academic domain, that’s waiting in the wings.The bill, in its current form, outlines that eligible institutions "develop a plan for offering alternatives to illegal downloading or peer-to-peer distribution of intellectual property as well as a plan to explore technology-based deterrents to prevent such illegal activity." While advocates emphasize that the only requirement is to plan, the wording leaves the door to state mandated copyright protections in exchange for federal funding wide open... a truly backwards and illogical arrangement. In this case, congressional requirements will most likely take the form of industry-sanctioned DRM initiatives, in addition to network detection/filtering techniques laden with privacy risks and prone to the inevitable backlash of technological countermeasures.
The link between failing to draft plans and eligibility for at least some student financial aid programs is most troubling because it does not address the inherently complex nature of piracy and copyright infringement in the 21st century. Instead it seeks to place the onus on university administrators, who are already in the midst of coming to grips with effective digital threat prevention. Introducing this type of government intervention does nothing to stimulate the desperately needed innovative solutions for the issues at hand. Also, from a policy perspective, the networks on campuses across the country differ mainly in scale from those governed by the likes of the Verizon and Comcast, meaning that a disconcerting and inappropriate model for anti-piracy legislative action is being shaped.
In the same way that universities provide an environment where some of the leading minds of the tomorrow’s society are shaped, specious legislative action that effects their rights as downloaders will impact their expectations of how privacy and civil liberties should be transposed to an increasingly digital world. It shouldn’t be left for the conspiracy theorists to suggest that this will begin the prying open of a Pandora’s Box of well-meaning public policy that falls short due to short-sighted intentions and narrow perspectives on the matters at hand.
Yet, in spite of these frightening possibilities combined with the fact that electronic piracy is fast on its way to becoming a hot-button issue, Congress doesn't appear to have any clue about the inappropriateness of these measures. That means, unfortunately, that it is unlikely they will support any sustained effort to remove the aberrant mandate. There are options that don't resemble placing economic sanctions on institutions of higher learning -- but it doesn't appear Congress is interested in pursuing them any time soon.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: anti-piracy, drm, unintended consequences, univerisities
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
It's time
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It's time
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: It's time
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: It's time
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It's time
Seriously, it would end up costing students a lot more if outside vendors had to come into the school and setup the dorms to run on their network, and it would create a huge headache for the school itself. Instead of having a handful of administrators extending the preexisting academic network, they'd have to split the network off. What then, the students would VPN into the school?
Outsourcing the IT services would be absolutely ridiculous, expensive, and useless. Instead of spending your time arguing that the school should change their own policies in response to the various AA's, spend a minute and email your congressmen to tell him how moronic this piece of the bill is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: It's time
Most people being shot at, tend to duck. But I see you are the brave type willing to take one for the team. Rah.
I still think the Institutions of Higher Learning should consider a change in the way they do business.
Congress is pondering legislation which will levy additional conditions upon their funding, usually this would get their attention. Kind of like a shot across the bow. Wow, maybe I should remove this target from my back ..... just a thought though ... do what you like.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: It's time
First, you want schools to roll over on stupid legislation because... well, because stupid legislation should rule over reason. Good thinking.
Second, by your logic, ISPs would have to get out of ISP business as well. You don't see a requirement for them to provide "legal" means for music downloads, but if you apply this ruling to schools, you can apply it to Verizon and Comcast just the same.
Conclusion: Skipped much of your Higher Learning?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: It's time
Errrr, what?
Where did I say roll over, or anything even close? I suggested they get out of the ISP business.
And where did I state legislation over reason? I suggested they remove the bait.
ISPs have to get out of business? What sort of axe does Congress have hanging over the ISP? Your logic is quite flawed.
No, I am not a genius, not by a long shot.
But then apparently neither are you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: It's time
Schools are doing something that is threatened by the new legislature, you recommend they stop doing it to avoid dealing with the legislature. That is rolling over, giving in to pressure.
"And where did I state legislation over reason? I suggested they remove the bait."
By "removing bait" you are validating the reasoning behind idiotic legislature.
"
ISPs have to get out of business? What sort of axe does Congress have hanging over the ISP?"
Same ax they have over colleges: legislature. New restrictions and requirements. If a college as ISP can be required to do one thing, why wouldn't you want to require ISPs to do the same? In case you didn't notice, there is already a push for that.
You don't have to be a genius, but really, being a moron is not your only other choice.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
wait, what?
What does the first part of this statement mean? Offering alternatives to downloading or distribution of illegal content? I keep reading it as meaning "having a plan for users within the university to obtain copyrighted content through legal channels". Which suggests to me images of universities licensing huge chunks of content from movie studios, software houses and so forth. Which couldn't be right....could it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: wait, what?
As we described a few months back, it means corporate welfare for companies like Napster and Ruckus that claim to offer "authorized" music offerings:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071115/173305.shtml
Universities would be *required* to sign up for such services. A huge boost for those companies, but not necessarily anyone else.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
WiMax at the .edu
[ link to this | view in chronology ]