Paramount Says 28 Day Delay On Redbox Makes No Sense; Doesn't Cannibalize DVD Sales
Neil Gaiman And Todd McFarlane Fight Over Whose Derivative Character Is Owned By Whom

Gov't Reminds Colleges They Need To Start Taking Money From Students And Sending It To The Entertainment Industry

Politics

from the nice-of-them dept

Wed, Jun 16th 2010 9:53am — Mike Masnick
You may remember that the entertainment industry was able to get a nice little clause inserted into the Higher Education Opportunity Act of 2008 that required universities to educate students on the evils of file sharing, to try to block file sharing on campus and also to sign up for "legal" alternatives (i.e., charge students more money to filter it directly to the record labels and movie studios). Yes, you read that right. The law requires universities to push their students to use "legal alternatives," even to the point of having the university take "activity fees" from students for that purpose From the Department of Education's website:
34 CFR 668.14(b)(30) also requires that an institution, in consultation with the chief technology officer or other designated officer of the institution, to the extent practicable, offer legal alternatives to illegal downloading or otherwise acquiring copyrighted material, as determined by the institution. An institution must periodically review the legal alternatives for downloading or otherwise acquiring copyrighted material, and make the results of the review available to its students through a Web site or other means.
It was a clear case of the government creating subsidies for the entertainment industry, by taking money away from students and education. It's difficult to see how anyone can defend such a law. Universities that fail to do this face the possibility of losing financial aid for students. Seriously.

We hadn't heard much about this in a while, but Michael Scott points us to the news that the Department of Education has started sending out letters reminding universities and colleges that this part of the law goes into effect in July. The letter itself reminds universities of the various requirements to stay on the entertainment industry's good side. Higher Education Opportunity Act or Subsidize the Entertainment Industry Again Act?
Hide this

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: colleges, copyright, education, financial aid, subsidies, universities

49 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • icon
    Jay (profile), 16 Jun 2010 @ 9:56am

    Is it just me...

    Or does this sound like it's becoming increasingly similar to the MacArthur Commu... er... Witchhunts?

    Seriously, how are we supposed to fight the Entertainment industry when they have all the money?

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Hephaestus (profile), 16 Jun 2010 @ 10:38am

      Re: Is it just me...

      "Seriously, how are we supposed to fight the Entertainment industry when they have all the money?"

      You really dont have to fight them. This is an attempt to push students who can barely pay for food to pay for content. It is also an attempt to re-educate and train the students to purchase content from the record labels and TV-Movie studios. Its not going to work for multiple reasons the big one is there are other free sources for the same content, the second is students tend to rebel, the third is the universities cant prevent the use of encryption or VPN's.

      But if you want to attack them head on, think outside the box. The law states "offer legal alternatives to illegal downloading or otherwise acquiring copyrighted material" How do we use this to our advantage?

      Provide all the universities with ...
      1- the top 10,000 Creative commons songs.
      2- Weekly top 200 CC song.
      3- Weekly top 20 CC movies.
      4- Weekly top 20 CC shows.
      5- a used DVD and CD swapping and sales site.
      6- links for every TV studios site plus HULU to watch content online.
      7- Create a University based library system for DVD and CD loans.
      8- Add in a link for NetFlix subscriptions.
      9- Suggestion Area to request new features.
      10- Open source and CC books database and library.
      11- Free Music area for artists to promote themselves, with voting on quality and social networking links.
      12- Content addition area.

      Basically use the rules they created against them in a way that removes their profits.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Brian (profile), 16 Jun 2010 @ 10:39am

      Re: Is it just me...

      Fight them? Your not supposed to fight them, they are your friends who know whats best for you. I even heard that starting January of next year you can setup a special direct deposit with your employer so that your entire paycheck just goes directly to the record and movie studios. This way they get all your money and you can't be tempted by the evils of file sharing since you won't have money to pay for an internet connection!

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    crade (profile), 16 Jun 2010 @ 9:58am

    I'm glad I got to go to University when they still got to chose what to teach based on merit. I feel bad for my children though. Even without the money, dictating educational content is a big step away from free thinking.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 16 Jun 2010 @ 10:04am

    If the law just says universities have to offer "legal alternatives", what is to stop them from just promoting free ad-based services such as Pandora and calling it a day?

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      mdominguez2nd (profile), 16 Jun 2010 @ 10:42am

      Re:

      One of the schools I attended actually offered Rhapsody at a much lower rate - approx 2$ a month. Another one actively promoted sites like Hulu and Pandora through emails and fliers.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 16 Jun 2010 @ 10:08am

    "charge students more money to filter it directly to the record labels and movie studios"

    This is worse than a tax. A tax is allegedly intended to serve the common good but instead this subsidy only serves a private good that will probably end up using it to sue us and lobby congress to pass more draconian laws that only serve the common detriment.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    C, 16 Jun 2010 @ 10:10am

    Jamendo FTW

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Steve (profile), 16 Jun 2010 @ 10:20am

    laughable

    Because nothing says "good use of educational funds" like funneling money to record executives and Lars Ulrich. At this point I believe the entertainment industry is trying to act as absurdly as possible. The scary part is how the government supports such policies. I'm not sure when it happened but at some point the government stopped representing the people and started representing big business. Our country's founders would be sickened by this.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Sheepy, 16 Jun 2010 @ 10:26am

    There is no language in that letter suggesting that schools use student tech fees (as a student, I was concerned!), rather that schools must have anti-piracy policies in place that include information about legal alternatives. As one person said, this might include pointing people to Pandora or Hulu. Some universities might opt to get an institutional Netflix streaming account if such a thing exists, but even to this OSS/CC fangirl this post seems to be blowing things out of proportion. The only mention of payment is in regards to fees for noncompliance.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Steve (profile), 16 Jun 2010 @ 10:33am

      Re:

      But by asking schools to promote "legal alternatives" on behalf of the entertainment industry aren't schools wasting time and money? The school's technology staff is still going to be paid by the school to set up systems to push the entertainment industry's agenda. It's free advertising for music and movie studios that the school pays for. That is money taken away from eduaction to prop up an outdated and failed business model.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 16 Jun 2010 @ 10:35am

      Re:

      Yeah, I also don't see where it says that money should be channeled directly from student fees to the entertainment industry. I think it might have been another clause?

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Mike Masnick (profile), 16 Jun 2010 @ 10:49am

      Re:

      There is no language in that letter suggesting that schools use student tech fees (as a student, I was concerned!), rather that schools must have anti-piracy policies in place that include information about legal alternatives.

      It's true that the language of the bill does not require them to use student fees, but much of the discussion around the bill was about exactly that situation. The language of the bill is vague enough that to avoid liability, it's likely that many universities will, in fact, use student funds to signup for campus-wide deals.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        SteelWolf (profile), 16 Jun 2010 @ 11:00am

        Re: Re:

        I know my university did this several times even before the legislation was passed. First there CDMagic (or something similarly named), when that fell apart the entire University System of Maryland signed a deal with Ruckus (remember that?). In both cases very, very few students were interested in the services, and all of that student money got wasted. What's frustrating is that the industry got the money regardless - a sunk cost for us, two consecutive payouts for them.

        It's as though it doesn't matter whether the service is good or students use it - they just have to convince universities to sign deals so they can collect the money up front. How come we can't demand a refund?

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Sheepy (profile), 16 Jun 2010 @ 11:29am

        Re: Re:

        Which they already do for cable service, magazine subscriptions, etc.

        Given the state of most library budgets, I expect that most schools will stick to a once or twice a semester email reminder of policy with links to legal alternatives. *Unless* some of those services do something ridiculous for the campus, which is how my school only sells Pepsi. That to me is a broader question of the ethics of sponsorship, rather than specifically pandering to the media industry.

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Another User, 16 Jun 2010 @ 10:29am

    Does this mean students can now download all the music they want since they have to pay a tax?

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Mike, 16 Jun 2010 @ 11:41am

      Re:

      ITs more like, since we know you are going to download things anyway-- you need to be taxed for that. However, youre still not allowed to do it!

      It reminds me of the theft tax that Binghamton Universitys food supplier (Sodexo) charged. They automatically assume students will end up eventually (even if not intentionally) stealing food (or other supplies like napkins and cups). So they were prematurely charged a theft tax when they bought a mealplan (which was required for oncampus students). This isnt giving you PERMISSION to steal, its just assuming you will... and if you get caught stealing a bunch, youll still probably get in trouble.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Mike, 16 Jun 2010 @ 11:43am

        Re: Re:

        Also, Ill add, many students used the theft tax as an excuse to steal (or steal more). "Hey Im paying for it anyway, might as well take a ketchup bottle or two".

        I assume itd be the same with a pirater tax.

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 16 Jun 2010 @ 10:43am

    It is a good thing then that universities already have such a "legal alternative" called a library. (Many libraries lend dvds and other media besides just books)

    Also, I noticed the section of the law above just says "copyrighted material" which seems kind of open ended. This could mean books, music, movies, photos, video games, just about any other computer software, and a ton of other things that can be copyrighted.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    ChurchHatesTucker (profile), 16 Jun 2010 @ 10:47am

    Easy out

    "to the extent practicable"

    Yeah, I'm not going to bother with that. It's not practicable. I've got real work to do.

    (Like that's ever going to happen.)

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Sean T Henry (profile), 16 Jun 2010 @ 11:14am

    I do not have the time to read the DMCA again but when researching this issue before I remember that by actively filtering and monitoring the network at the school they can/will lose safe harbor provisions.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Overcast (profile), 16 Jun 2010 @ 11:21am

    So - what about the students who don't download free music - they pay too?

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Joel Coehoorn, 16 Jun 2010 @ 11:22am

    I am the "chief technology officer" at a small college (actual title is "Director of IT") that received such a letter. We read through the clause and decided that since all students have easy access to iTunes, Amazon mp3, Pandora, and pretty much every other legal music service out there, we had met the requirements in the letter. In other words, we didn't spend a dime in compliance because, like most other schools, we already comply.

    It's misleading to say that this requires us to spend money that could go to education elsewhere. The only thing it ultimately requires it we not block the legal services.

    Now, I know that's probably not what the entertainment industry had in mind, but that is the text of the regulation.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Flyfish, 16 Jun 2010 @ 11:25am

      Re:

      don't point out the facts, they get in the way of Mike's crusade.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Joel Coehoorn, 16 Jun 2010 @ 11:28am

      Re:

      Oh, and to add one more thing:

      The most telling thing that proves to me at least that this is a non-issue is the spam (or, rather, lack of spam) snail mail for campus music services. My office gets ads come in for every IT-related service imaginable. If there were really a sudden push among schools to roll out campus agreements for these services you'd better believe the competing services would be in full court press on the marketing front right now. Instead... nothing.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Nick Mc, 16 Jun 2010 @ 11:33am

    Re #18

    Try http://www.jamendo.com for CC music

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 16 Jun 2010 @ 11:47am

    A baby step

    The letter suggests "bandwidth shaping, traffic monitoring, ... and commercial products designed to reduce or block illegal file sharing" as means of complying.

    First universities, next all ISPs.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 16 Jun 2010 @ 12:46pm

    quick solution

    Hi students, this is a radio!. R-A-D-I-O. It's a legal alternative to illegal downloads. Done.

    Also, anyone wanting to protest, I suggest that when your university asks for donation money, you write back citing this as the reason you will not donate.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      SteelWolf (profile), 16 Jun 2010 @ 1:07pm

      Re: quick solution

      A lot of universities lobbied hard against this language. Unfortunately you can see how far that got us.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      net625, 16 Jun 2010 @ 1:22pm

      Re: quick solution

      Ummm, have you actually listened to the radio? The reason I don't listen to the radio is that the DJ talks to much, says the station name 30 times a minute and they play two songs and then lots of commercials. If you listen to a CD or songs on an portable media player you won't hear any adds or the name of your device between every song. When the DJ on the radio eventually does get around to playing any music its from a selection of 20-30 songs that I don't care about.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Jay (profile), 16 Jun 2010 @ 1:51pm

    @net625

    Advertising goes into the radio. Then on top of that, they only play 20-30 songs, which the collection agencies take. It must be hard to play just music when the profit is being taken all over the place.

    Honestly, it's enough to make you want to eliminate all of the laws and think back to a time when there wasn't so much governing our freedoms.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    mariovistus (profile), 16 Jun 2010 @ 3:16pm

    Adding new meaning to the made up word edutainment.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Copper (profile), 16 Jun 2010 @ 5:27pm

    At the university I current attend, we are required to read a webpage before signing into the college network. That webpage has some information on what is and is not legal in terms of file sharing, and offers a few links to legal alternatives. That's all they have to do to comply with this law. It's a minor inconvenience for whatever IT monkey had to code it, but it certainly isn't "taking money from students and sending it to the entertainment industry."

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Mike Raphone, 16 Jun 2010 @ 6:01pm

    Parasites and Weasels

    The parasites and weasels are up to their old tricks. First there was the surcharge on Cassettes that were capable of High Fidelity recording of music whether or not the purchaser used the cassette to record copyrighted material. The proceeds from the surcharge were sent to the Copyright Control Agencies. Next came the surcharge on Music CD ROM's and Serial Copy Management System. Again the customer was forced to pay a surcharge for CD ROM's that are coded for use in consumer CD Recorders whether or not the CD ROM's were used to copy copyrighted material. Furthermore the Serial Copy Management System prevented copying of a copy even if recorded through the analog inputs on the recorder. This is another case where the entertainment industry is using our lawmakers to force students to make payment for something the students may never use. PIGS

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      United Weasels Federation, 17 Jun 2010 @ 5:28am

      Re: Parasites and Weasels

      We object to your characterisations. Weasels get a bad name because of a few chickens that went missimg ... big deal. No where near as bad as the parasites who are not self sufficient.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Simba7 (profile), 16 Jun 2010 @ 6:35pm

    "Hi students, this is a radio!. R-A-D-I-O. It's a legal alternative to illegal downloads. Done."

    Didn't you miss the memo that the Radio is another form of Piracy, too?
    http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2008/06/recording-indus/

    I say, screw the RIAA/MPAA. I'm sick of them turning the U.S. into China where everyone is presumed guilty and everything must be monitored and filtered appropriately.. according to them.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Jay (profile), 16 Jun 2010 @ 7:36pm

    You don't realize how much they lobby...

    Guys, the RIAA stays in Washington...

    In the ears of Congress...

    Always decreeing the evils of "piracy"

    Source

    Same donors, same large amounts, it's the gift that keeps on giving.

    Justice, my friends, can be bought for the right party.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Darryl, 17 Jun 2010 @ 6:41am

    That is why they are called LAWS - would you prefer a lawless society - or to pick the laws you want to obey ?

    Yes, dont you just hate it when a state of Government actively enforce the laws and rules that that are in place to create the society.

    I bet that same group of nasty people actually hire people to ensure you do not break the road rules, and hire people to make sure you pay your taxes, and people to make sure you dont rob banks, or kill people.

    Im sure they also periodically remind people of what the laws and social expectations are from people.

    In this case they are not enforcing the law as such, they are pointing out that it is illegal (under the law), and pointing out that there are legal alternatives for what they want. Just like there are legal alternatives to bank robbing to get money, (like get a job). And you think it would be wrong to make sure those who are breaking the law (whatever law), should not be shown that there are legal and socially correct alternatives ?

    They did not "raid" any places, they just gave a gentle reminder. In most cases if there is clear evidence that a crime has taken place, it is encumbent upon the governing body to enforce the same laws for all people.

    It is not what you steal, clearly stealing is wrong, and what you steal has little bearing on the act itself.

    what do they say,,, "do the crime, do the time".

    What is a crime, it is an act against a specified law.

    If there is a law against unauthorised file sharing of copyright material, then that is the end of it, its the law.

    And no different than a law to stop you bank robbing, or murder. And its not up to you breaker of the law to determine its damage or severity. Otherwise again, everyone would never actually do any damage, but that is why that decision is not made by the law breaker, (its called taking the law into your own hands, its frowned upon).

    Like them or not, laws are laws, they are rules for a society that enables a level of getting along. And you dont get to pick and choose which laws you want to obey or disobey. All you can do, is if you dont like the laws where you are, go somewhere else.

    But most people find the existance of laws, and law enforcement makes a place better to live in, not worse.
    I cant think of many places that are lawless, that would be that nice to go too, or to live.

    So its because those nasty Governments uphold laws, ALL laws thats what makes a place good to live in. Go figure !!!

    And the places where there are less laws, or laws are not enforced, they are most often places you dont want to be found after dark...

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 17 Jun 2010 @ 10:34am

      Re: That is why they are called LAWS - would you prefer a lawless society - or to pick the laws you want to obey ?

      Your argument might bear wieght if the laws were enforced equally and equitably.

      I'm only talking about enforcement, not how much money was donated to create said law.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 17 Jun 2010 @ 7:07am

    That is why they are called LAWS - would you prefer a lawless society - or to pick the laws you want to obey ?

    "If there is a law against unauthorised file sharing of copyright material, then that is the end of it, its the law." - Darryl

    That's the kind of rationale you can come up when you've been homeschooled in Texas and your favourite TV propaganda machine is Fox News.

    Let's see...

    "If there is a law establishing slavery, then that is the end of it, its the law."

    "If there is a law against women's rights, then that is the end of it, its the law."

    "If there is a law in favour of corporations stealing and locking culture from the rest of the society, then that is the end of it, its the law."

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    BP, 17 Jun 2010 @ 3:56pm

    I DON'T WAS COMPLETELY LIABLE FOR GULF INCIDENT

    info@internet-group.co.uk

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]


Paramount Says 28 Day Delay On Redbox Makes No Sense; Doesn't Cannibalize DVD Sales
Neil Gaiman And Todd McFarlane Fight Over Whose Derivative Character Is Owned By Whom
Follow Techdirt
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Discord

The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...

Loading...
Recent Stories

Friday

19:39 Important Announcement: Techdirt Is Migrating To A New Platform (0)
More arrow

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.