Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

New TN Law Forces Universities To Patrol For Copyright Violations

timothy posted more than 5 years ago | from the skipping-the-monkey-trial-entirely dept.

Censorship 331

CSMatt points with this excerpt from the EFF's page: "Last week, the RIAA celebrated the signing of a ridiculous new law in Tennessee that says: 'Each public and private institution of higher education in the state that has student residential computer networks shall: [...] [R]easonably attempt to prevent the infringement of copyrighted works over the institution's computer and network resources, if such institution receives fifty (50) or more legally valid notices of infringement as prescribed by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 within the preceding year.' While the entertainment industry failed to get 'hard' requirements for universities in the Higher Education Act passed by Congress earlier this year, the RIAA succeeded in Tennessee (and is pushing in other states) with this provision that gives Big Content the ability to hold universities hostage through the use of infringement notices. Moreover, the new rules will cost Tennessee a pretty penny — in the cost review attached to the Tennessee bill, the state's Fiscal Review Committee estimates that the new obligations will initially cost the state a whopping $9.5 million for software, hardware, and personnel, with recurring annual costs of more than $1.5 million for personnel and maintenance."

cancel ×

331 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Nashville's recording industry (5, Insightful)

Leebert (1694) | more than 5 years ago | (#25800783)

How is this surprising? The recording industry is a multi-billion dollar industry in Nashville.

Re:Nashville's recording industry (5, Funny)

Drakkenmensch (1255800) | more than 5 years ago | (#25800807)

Who in their right mind would even want to steal country music? You couldn't pay me enough to accept it legally.

Re:Nashville's recording industry (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25800885)

Who in their right mind would even want to steal country music? You couldn't pay me enough to accept it legally.

That sounds like a song!

I broke my toe when I stole some songs.....

My wife left me for my maid Sue Wong....

My dog bit me when I was young...

I hate movies, with Sean Young....

Everybody now!

Life is su...cky....

Don't step in the muck

Come on! everyone!

Re:Nashville's recording industry (4, Interesting)

theaveng (1243528) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801029)

Country music is the most popular form of music in America according to Arbitron radio ratings.

Re:Nashville's recording industry (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25801129)

Who listens to the radio?

Re:Nashville's recording industry (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25801313)

Rednecks, apparently.

Re:Nashville's recording industry (1)

mc900ftjesus (671151) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801419)

Terrestrial radio? How quaint.

Re:Nashville's recording industry (1)

theaveng (1243528) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801447)

Quaint, yes, but also free (I like that word). And it's not blocked by my idiot employer.

Re:Nashville's recording industry (2, Insightful)

Wovel (964431) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801559)

It is not "free" , stop believing the lies. Every time you sit through a commercial you have "paid".

Re:Nashville's recording industry (1)

dkf (304284) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801633)

It is not "free" , stop believing the lies. Every time you sit through a commercial you have "paid".

No. You're just not the customer. You're the user (well, assuming you like country music) but it is the advertiser who is the customer.

Re:Nashville's recording industry (4, Insightful)

hey! (33014) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801285)

Wrong question.

Right question: who in their right mind would want to steal music dumbed down to music industry specifications?

Hank Williams Sr., Bill Monroe, Roy Acuff, the Carters, Johnny Cash, Carl Perkins -- the list goes on of worthwhile country musicians. The industry isn't run by creative people, it does its best to strangle of the life out of any kind of music it touches.

Re:Nashville's recording industry (4, Insightful)

Alarindris (1253418) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801331)

Absolutely. Hell, Les Paul basically invented multi-track recording. He was decades ahead of his time.

Re:Nashville's recording industry (5, Funny)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801361)

how bigoted of you. People in that region listen to more than just country music. They have both kinds of music, country and western.

Re:Nashville's recording industry (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25800911)

It surprised me, anyhow. Where exactly is Nashville ? Sounds like an excellent spot to hold a dentists' convention !

It seems they value that more than education. (4, Insightful)

khasim (1285) | more than 5 years ago | (#25800957)

It seems that they're more interested in protecting the music industry than supporting the education of their people.

Anyone want to predict what the outcome will be in about 20 years?

Re:It seems they value that more than education. (4, Insightful)

internerdj (1319281) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801067)

Quite frankly those who will suffer from reduced education are not the people Tennessee is interested in having in its state, because they are in a much lower tax bracket than the artists and more importantly the executives...

Re:It seems they value that more than education. (2, Funny)

theaveng (1243528) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801099)

TN colleges will need to "cut policing costs" and respond by limiting students' dorm access to 128 kbit/s (or thereabouts) such that downloading music or videos becomes impractical. TN administrators will argue that 128 kbit/s is "good enough" for accessing the required course-related websites (mostly text), and engineering or computer science students will need to apply for a professor-signed waiver to get faster access.

Those students will later come into positions of power, remember the hell of limited dorm access, and then repeal this ridiculous law so future students can access the net unencumbered.

Re:It seems they value that more than education. (1)

theaveng (1243528) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801133)

If I lived in such a dorm, I'd switch to dialup. V.44-compressed dialup is equivalent to a 300kbit/s uncompressed broadband line... therefore faster.

Re:It seems they value that more than education. (1)

troll8901 (1397145) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801609)

V.44-compressed dialup is equivalent to a 300kbit/s uncompressed broadband line...

Not trying to be picky, but are you sure?

Social networking would still work, after a fashio (2, Interesting)

Mathinker (909784) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801317)

The students could still run a website where people would advertise what content they had, and how to contact them to gain "access" to it, face-to-face. The university would be compliant, since this website, AFAICS, would not violate the DMCA itself. It might be in violation of "encouraging copyright infringement", but that's different, I think.

If the students are clever, and advertise the site as something which helps you meet other students with similar tastes in music, I think it might be hard to get any kind of ruling against it.

Re:Social networking would still work, after a fas (1)

theaveng (1243528) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801501)

I used to do that back in the days of BBSes (using a speedy 2.4 kbit/s connection).

We posted publicly what CDs we owned, and then had "copy parties" to record tapes of each other's possessions. It was an effective method albeit time-consuming.

Re:It seems they value that more than education. (2, Insightful)

MightyYar (622222) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801327)

If I were the colleges, I would just farm out the student connections - thus removing my liability. Access to the local network would be via VPN.

Why not nat the dorms with a waiver to get IP / fo (1)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801489)

Why not nat the dorms with a waiver to get a IP that can be used network wide / forwarded ports?

Re:It seems they value that more than education. (0)

sumdumass (711423) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801253)

How is making reasonable efforts to stop illegal file sharing not supporting the education of their people?

Err, let me rephrase that, how is illegal file sharing supporting the education of the people in that making reasonable attempts to stop it is not supporting the education of the people?

I just don't understand how you can see the two connected in ways that are detrimental to each other.

Re:It seems they value that more than education. (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25801391)

I just don't understand how you can see the two connected in ways that are detrimental to each other.

They are both competing for time and resources. Money used for stopping illegal file sharing is money that won't be spent on education.

Re:It seems they value that more than education. (2, Insightful)

jeffasselin (566598) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801463)

Strawman!

The question you have to ask is WHY is file sharing illegal. To protect the recording industry's outdated business model.

The enxt question is WHY is the population (because it is them through their taxes) asked to PAY for enforcing a law that makes them and their children criminals in order to line the pockets of music executives?

Why is an university forced to limit the freedom (academic or otherwise) because the music industry decided it should?

Re:It seems they value that more than education. (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25801533)

I don't know what the stats are for universities in Tennessee, but here on the University of Washington campus we hear about the rates of sexual abuse being 1 in 4 for females and 1 in 10 for males.

Whenever this shit happens, I always wonder why people don't just start wandering around by the state house, muttering things like "How much rape could 9 million dollars prevent?"

Maybe with a ballot in their hand or something. I don't know.

(prophetic CAPTCHA: "plenty")

Re:Nashville's recording industry (1)

tripdizzle (1386273) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801053)

"...cost the state a whopping $9.5 million for software, hardware, and personnel, with recurring annual costs of more than $1.5 million for personnel and maintenance."

Then they should have to pay for the infrastructure necessary to track/stop the violations.

Re:Nashville's recording industry (4, Insightful)

ElizabethGreene (1185405) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801119)

The timing and pricetag are rather surprising, considering the state's current 800 Million dollar projected budget shortfall.

-ellie

do you sing? no,... really (5, Interesting)

Simonetta (207550) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801369)

Yes, do you sing? You listen to recordings of other people singing and find them pleasurable. You make copies of these recordings so that you can get the same pleasure later. You actively listen to new radio and television shows in order to hear new songs to repeat this cycle. You go to bars and concerts to hear other people sing, even without hearing their recordings previously.

  But you don't really sing yourself. It feels weird. You look weird doing it. Everyone looks at you weird should you do it. Everyone accepts that music and singing is what's on a disk that comes from an 'artist' and is something that you buy from a disk shop. Or download on a bit torrent. And get hassled and extorted by the RIAA who occasionally spy on your downloading. Something that they gave themselves the right to do without asking you.

  This is your-our cultural input conduit. It is based on the economic concept that the best singers and song makers will physically go to a centralized city, meet with the best music instrument players, sing and play together, and the recording of this will be put on a disk. A corporation will make millions of copies, send these disk copies to all corners of the globe, sell them to people who enjoy the best singing and playing, keep most of the money for themselves and give the singers a few pennies maybe from every dollar that they collect from selling these magic music disks.

  A hundred years go by and this strange economic model transcends mere commerce and becomes the primary cultural conduit for most people in the developed world.

  But it is an aberration. It's only a 20th century phenomenon. It didn't exist in the hundred centuries before the 20th. And now the 20th is over. And the centralized cultural distribution model is getting better at putting you in jail, extorting your financial resources, and getting you thrown out of school than it is at meeting your basic human cultural needs.

  So get a new model; get a new cultural conduit. Go back to the ways before the 20th century that people used to develop their cultural resources. Where are you going to find new music if not from recordings? From books. There is a system for writing and reading music. It works. Learn it. Where am I going to hear and share new songs? From listening to people sing them to you. And by you singing new songs to them. Sure it hurts the ears at first. Sure it feels weird and silly and uncomfortable. But these are only 20th century cultural conditionings. And the 20th century is over. Time to leave it behind.

    This is the only way that we are going to stop the RIAA. By developing a parallel culture that meets our needs. And then keeping it secret from the 20th century music corporations.

    Learn to sing.

Re:do you sing? no,... really (1)

russotto (537200) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801587)

Where are you going to find new music if not from recordings? From books. There is a system for writing and reading music. It works. Learn it. Where am I going to hear and share new songs? From listening to people sing them to you. And by you singing new songs to them. Sure it hurts the ears at first.

And again, and again, and again. Two names: William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy. Most people don't sound any better than those two.

Besides, none of this avoids copyright. There's copyright on sheet music; it applies to performing that music publicly. There's copyright on lyrics, which apply to performing those lyrics publicly.

Re:Nashville's recording industry (1)

cavis (1283146) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801381)

A very valid point. And with that industry comes legislators from that community or with direct ties, as well as a strong music industry lobby.

And, this stands in stark contrast to what is happening in Michigan with the state government versus the RIAA.

Re:Nashville's recording industry (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25801449)

Glad I don't live in Tekken!

Money "well" spent (2, Insightful)

richien6 (1406455) | more than 5 years ago | (#25800843)

To be honest I can usually be a little uninformed about the RIAA and DRM and whatnot...
But come fu*king on! Why the hell would you spend millions of dollars on protection like this?? That money could sure as hell be spent elsewhere, since not only could the rest of the world use it but also even the USA themselves...

Re:Money "well" spent (5, Interesting)

darkfire5252 (760516) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801079)

As a University of Tennessee student, I am pretty pissed. I posted copies of the Ars Technica (I believe) article that discussed this bill as it was making its way through the congress; absolutely everyone who read it was amazed and pissed that such a thing was even being talked about, including university employees that will become responsible for enforcement. Even worse is the fact that the University of Tennessee is currently undergoing massive budget cuts [utk.edu] , and I'm sure that this money that now legally must be spent will be dollars that used to be used educating Tennesseans and others.

Regarding budget cuts, from the campus paper linked above:

The University of Tennessee system sustained an initial $21.2 million budget cut in June, followed by an additional October impoundment of $17 million. All campuses have been affected and have taken similar measures, of varying degrees of severity, to offset these reductions.

As a result of the initial cut, the Knoxville campus reduced its budget by $11,452,500; the Chattanooga campus by $2,682,200; the Martin campus by $1,965,000; and the UT Health Sciences Center by $2,751,500, according to the proposed budget for the 2009 fiscal year, released by the UT System Budget and Finance Office. Other UT branches affected included the Space Institute, the Institute of Agriculture, the Institute for Public Administration and the Systems Administration division.

Re:Money "well" spent (1)

purpledinoz (573045) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801093)

Where are all those conservatives screaming "think of our children!"? Do they only come out when a boob accidentally slips out of bra on TV? I can't believe America allows companies to extort consumers using the citizen's legal system. In my opinion, it is now immoral to buy music from RIAA labels.

What is legally valid? (5, Insightful)

I_am_Rambi (536614) | more than 5 years ago | (#25800849)

"...if such institution receives fifty (50) or more legally valid notices of infringement as prescribed by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998..."

According to a recently lawsuit [thecrimson.com] against the RIAA on the legality of their tactics, I would question if the notices are legally valid or not.

Re:What is legally valid? (5, Interesting)

aproposofwhat (1019098) | more than 5 years ago | (#25800921)

What's even funnier is that the DMCA isn't the law at issue here - it's the Digital Theft Deterrence and Copyright Damages Improvement Act of 1999 that is being used against filesharers.

I wonder if there is some wit in the Tennessee legislature having a good laugh at the expense of the RIAA?

Re:What is legally valid? (1)

jgtg32a (1173373) | more than 5 years ago | (#25800943)

If they get 50 people to pay up then I guess it was legal.

Re:What is legally valid? (4, Interesting)

Ken D (100098) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801175)

Right, now they have an incentive to spend up to $1.5M per year challenging bogus DMCA notices instead of rolling over.

Re:What is legally valid? (2, Interesting)

infalliable (1239578) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801197)

I sense a huge uptick in the number of infringement notices sent to Tennessee schools.

Who determines if they're legally valid?

Re:What is legally valid? (2, Insightful)

kmac06 (608921) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801207)

So which is cheaper for the universities, pay lawyers to get a judge to decide the notices as not valid, or just pay the extra employee(s) to police the campus in place of the RIAA? I'm guessing the latter.

Of course the third (and most expensive) option is to pay off the legislators, as I'm sure the RIAA did.

Re:What is legally valid? (1)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801473)

It's a good question -- I know that DMCA takedown notices generally must be acted on immediately, whether actually valid or not, and the burden then falls on the accused to fire a counter-notice.

One of the more disgusting parts is that the takedown notice doesn't carry any kind of penalty, while the counter-notice requires the accused to claim "under penalty of perjury" that they do, in fact, have the right to do that.

So, does this require said notices to actually be proven valid? If so, I'd suggest universities continue to not cooperate until there is actual proof of their validity -- and that will be very difficult to prove without help from the university.

On the other hand, if the only requirement is that the notices be properly filled out, but not that they are actually true, it's worth mentioning that it only takes one person to send enough notices to all schools to force them to comply. The question is whether such an act would actually be noticed and heard, and have an effect on the law.

Copyleft (1, Insightful)

wienerschnizzel (1409447) | more than 5 years ago | (#25800879)

Hopefully this will result in universities using more open source/copyleft stuff. Someone is shooting himself in the foot here.

Re:Copyleft (1, Insightful)

boarder8925 (714555) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801173)

Hopefully this will result in universities using more open source/copyleft stuff.

Good luck with that.

Re:Copyleft (-1, Troll)

Dog-Cow (21281) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801221)

Apparently someone shot you in the head. Your post makes absolutely no sense at all.

Re:Copyleft (1)

MightyYar (622222) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801367)

Apparently someone shot you in the head.

Only the right side died.

US Residents listen up: (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25800883)

Do you want to be ruled by a proper governement, or by money-making orginazations? If you don't want to be ruled by the latter, get f*cking up and f*cking do something about those f*ckers, protest, bring down the system, whatever, but don't sit on your lazy asses and make this all just happen, because before you know it your governement will be corporations, and NOBODY has anything to gain being ruled by corporations ruled by a few rich people, those people should never be allowed the power they have.

Re:US Residents listen up: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25801151)

get f*cking up and f*cking do something about those f*ckers, protest, bring down the system, whatever, but don't sit on your lazy asses

...said a poster on Slashdot, probably from his couch.

Re:US Residents listen up: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25801507)

If anyone has got to do it it's gotta be slashdot posters because regular anarchists don't care about information technology and the associated rights.

Indie Music (5, Insightful)

mfh (56) | more than 5 years ago | (#25800901)

Stop listening to garbage music that corporate America wants you to buy. Indie music is free and you can't be sued for downloading it freely, because it's offered as a promotional gimmick to sell concert tickets. Many Indie bands advocate people sharing purchased copies of their albums, because musicians know that this freely sharing of music creates more fans. Look at Radiohead... how much did they earn on that album they released as donor-ware?

Sure you can apply all the regulations you want but you're just excluding people from your products in the long run.

Closed P2P (2, Insightful)

mfh (56) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801069)

Another approach to fighting RIAA and MPAA would be to create a kind of digital fingerprint process that would allow Indie bands and film makers to freely release their stuff over a closed P2P utilizing user accounts. This type of thing has been attempted in the past with great failure, but it's possible that with the proper interest, a push to exclude greedy practices from infiltrating P2P networks would be essential.

A theory of mine is that many record labels would want to release their stuff for free on P2P so that they can sue later and reap big rewards. That song used to generate $0.99 each, but after you seed it and nurture it, the windfall is $2500 for each song for each downloader.

Tell me this isn't happening!!!!!!

Re:Closed P2P (1)

squizzar (1031726) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801271)

Surely just a good torrent site where you know that everything tracked is provided by the artists, and the copyright status is known and allows sharing etc. would do the trick. In fact something like it probably exists already.

Re:Closed P2P (2, Informative)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801543)

If by "fingerprint" you mean something giving you access, you're talking about DRM, which is unacceptable.

If by "fingerprint" you mean a watermark, to identify people who share songs, that might work, but it generally means either adding a bit of metadata (which is easily stripped out), or some sort of stenography (which may decrease quality and impact compressibility).

And a watermark wouldn't actually work with P2P, since if it's metadata applied by the client, it's that much easier to realize it's happening (and how to strip it out), and if it's not applied by the client, the main benefits of P2P are gone -- a torrent results in everyone getting the exact same file, and you want to give everyone a different file.

So you can either use P2P, or an effective watermark, but not both.

Re:Indie Music (1)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801337)

[quote]Many Indie bands advocate people sharing purchased copies of their albums, because musicians know that this freely sharing of music creates more fans.[/quote]

They do that until they get big, then they often start complaining about all this sharin' goin' on. Most people generally advocate what they think is best for them right now, even if that's different than what helped them get where they are.

Re:Indie Music (2, Funny)

Nerogk (1096421) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801647)

Because when I think Indie, I think Radiohead.

Wishfull thinking (5, Insightful)

Thanshin (1188877) | more than 5 years ago | (#25800913)

Sometimes I need some detachment from slashdot to be able to keep reading. I know it's stupid and insensitive and wrong on many levels but I have to say it.

News like this give me the same feelings as horrible wars in third world countries. The more I learn the more revulsion I feel and it reaches a point where I simply detach and start thinking about something else. I transport myself to the little world around myself where those things simply don't happen.

I know about the "...now they come after me and there's nobody else left to care." parable, but still, I need a beer and a quiet mind to deal with extreme evil, or, as in this case, with extreme idiocy/corruption.

Thats too bad. (4, Interesting)

Alarindris (1253418) | more than 5 years ago | (#25800941)

It just seems like the population doesn't get to participate in democracy anymore. Other than record companies, who could possibly think this makes sense? Or demand that such a law should be passed?

As far as music goes, I haven't heard anything worth buying in a while anyway. And I certainly wouldn't expect to hear it on the radio (they aren't giving us any other options atm). For now I'll just keep my torrents seeding and buy merch from the bands I do like, which funny enough, are mostly all from 1980 or before, so they've all got their mansions already anyhow.

Hey record labels, your biggest market (for touring bands anyway) is college students. Why do you guys want to get rid of all of that free marketing? (word of mouth, mix CD's etc.) Get a clue.

Re:Thats too bad. (4, Insightful)

Sponge Bath (413667) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801139)

...seems like the population doesn't get to participate in democracy anymore.

The population has access to all the democratic participation that they can afford.

Re:Thats too bad. (1)

Alarindris (1253418) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801195)

Got that right :(

Re:Thats too bad. (1)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801583)

I wouldn't call that "democratic", I'd call it "plutocratic".

I'd rather live in a democracy than a plutocracy... too late?

Valid (1)

zoomshorts (137587) | more than 5 years ago | (#25800951)

" if such institution receives fifty (50) or more legally valid notices of infringement as prescribed by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 within the preceding year"

I am guessing that blanket "John Doe" notices are not really valid. Especially during the semester change-overs.
Who really knows who is using that connection?

Re:Valid (2, Insightful)

gfxguy (98788) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801007)

Really.... "reasonably attempt" and only if there are fifty or more "legally valid" notices...

The kind of legislation made by lawyers to increase the amount of time they get to charge customers for litigation.

As a Tennessean, may I say (3, Interesting)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 5 years ago | (#25800977)

Once again, I apologize for my home state. If it's any consolation, this is just one of MANY, MANY, MANY dumbass laws passed on a yearly basis there. I decided it was time to leave about the time they started looking at creationist laws. The Scoppes Monkey Trial taught them nothing.

What's the problem? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25800993)

I'm the Network Admin for a large (albeit British) institution, and we have the responsibility for the content of our equipment. If it's on student equipment, it's not my problem, but I certainly won't allow a free-for-all on my network nor my servers. I'm not an idiot, I can tell when content is infringing copyright or not, and I'll deal with it.

So you're a judge, also? (2, Interesting)

Mathinker (909784) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801457)

> I'm not an idiot, I can tell when content is infringing copyright or not, and I'll deal with it.

That's a good one! Look at the movie "Charade", for example. It was hosted for quite a while on archive.org because it was originally screened without a copyright notice. The MPAA found some loophole and got it taken down....

Re:So you're a judge, also? (1)

compro01 (777531) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801627)

No loophole. Under the Berne convention, all works are automatically copyrighted, notice or no notice, unless explicitly stated otherwise.

Re:What's the problem? (1, Interesting)

GuyverDH (232921) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801491)

Really now? You somehow know the inviolate checksums of every possible variation of every copyrighted work ever produced? WoW!!! I mean WOW!!! That's just amazing...

Do you happen to have a calendar of all future cataclismic events as well? Just asking, cause you could save the human race a lot of suffering if you'd share it...

Re:What's the problem? (1)

pak9rabid (1011935) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801643)

Really now? You somehow know the inviolate checksums of every possible variation of every copyrighted work ever produced? WoW!!! I mean WOW!!! That's just amazing... Do you happen to have a calendar of all future cataclismic events as well? Just asking, cause you could save the human race a lot of suffering if you'd share it...

I couldn't have put it in better words :)

Re:What's the problem? (1)

compro01 (777531) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801573)

The problem is that they're already getting their funding cut back by roughly $21 million and they're being legally forced to allocate $7.5 million to this bullshit, along with $1.5 million per year until this get repealed, money would I could think of far far better uses for.

Re:What's the problem? (1)

PotatoFarmer (1250696) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801655)

The problem is the wording of the law:

[R]easonably attempt to prevent the infringement of copyrighted works over the institution's computer and network resources.

First off, it's not clear who gets to define what "reasonably" means in this context. Secondly, student equipment would be your problem under the wording above, as it appears to cover anything using your network, not just devices you directly manage.
And finally, it's government. I'd be willing to bet that most of the network admins who would be affected by this law already approach their jobs like you do - see something fishy, nuke it, move on. However, once you need to prove that you're making a reasonable attempt at stopping infringement, things get a lot more complicated. Now there are audit trails and reporting databases and forms to fill out and all sorts of crap that turn what used to be a 10 second process into a tedious slog through red tape.

Nashville flexes its muscles (1)

sesshomaru (173381) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801017)

It's not surprising that this would happen in Tennessee, one of the music industry's strongholds in the U. S.

Hopefully it won't spread to other states.

The end of residential computer networks (5, Insightful)

davidwr (791652) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801039)

If I were a university, I'd take this as my cue to disconnect the residential university network from the campus network and outsource the connectivity. The students would have to VPN in if they wanted access to campus services.

This would probably be cheaper than complying with this law, and even if it weren't, it would send a message to the lawmakers to be mindful of the law of unintended consequences.

Re:The end of residential computer networks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25801211)

Ha! "Mindful of unintended consequences"? As in being mindful of the massively expensive and harmful consequences of the "War on Drugs"? I think they won't be mindful.

Re:The end of residential computer networks (1)

JasterBobaMereel (1102861) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801213)

...or send a bill to the RIAA for implementing their protection system

Re:The end of residential computer networks (2, Interesting)

the4thdimension (1151939) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801223)

Most uni's don't want to face downtime they can't control. Residential networks make it easy to set up services that students need without the hassle of diving out VPN software and having to troubleshoot that all day. Furthermore, your average college student won't even know what VPN means let alone how to install, run, and use one. This is a nightmare waiting to happen. In my opinion, the best thing a university can do at this point is do what all the smart ones did: ignore anything having to do with copyright laws, dmca, or regulations. The man will come down but uni's have good lawyers and they can/will win. This is just another classic case of the RIAA buying themselves a law.

Re:The end of residential computer networks (1)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801669)

Residential networks make it easy to set up services that students need without the hassle of diving out VPN software and having to troubleshoot that all day.

From experience, it seems that every university is going to have a bit of its own software to distribute anyway. From SSH clients to Kerberos-enabled printers...

Furthermore, your average college student won't even know what VPN means let alone how to install, run, and use one.

Your average college student knows how to use WoW, and P2P, and many other things that operate on the same principle -- start this program, (possibly) type a password, then you have access to these services.

Now, granted, the simpler and smarter solution is to provide all network services over something which can be secured -- most of it as HTTPS web services. Anyone have any idea how good support for IPP over SSL is?

There's a side benefit to this, also -- the school is no longer in the role of an ISP, and no longer has to support those students who don't even know how to open a web browser.

Logging into a VPN (1)

davidwr (791652) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801671)

If a student can't read a how-to-login-to-the-VPN instruction sheet, deny him access from his dorm until he can pass remedial instruction-following 001.

Re:The end of residential computer networks (1)

ACMENEWSLLC (940904) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801425)

I agree. If this law is focused on universities then what you do is transfer ownership of the P2P abusers Internet access to a 3rd party. Be it the local city (MUNI WIFI), DSL, or Cable Modems. Someone this law is not applicable to.

Make a deal so every dorm get's Internet access, but it is not provided by the University. I'm sure some hole in the law exists which enables removing this burden.

Block Internet Access on the student/residential VLAN, providing only local networking. Then prohibit P2P on the (now) Staff side of the VLAN which still has Internet Access.

IMO, University staff shouldn't be forced into becoming members of the political police. I'm not university, but I'm already being forced into a similar role in a corporate setting. I don't like it one bit.

My .02c

Re:The end of residential computer networks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25801479)

I'm the network admin for a small midwestern liberal arts school. We have definitely been looking into outsourcing our ResNet. I find it funny that students on TimeWarner don't get DMCA violation notices. I guess being a member of the RIAA and MPAA allows TW to tell them to bug off.

fp BITCH (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25801059)

being GAY NIIGERS. the reaper In a

Like they don't have anything bettet to do.... (2, Insightful)

olddotter (638430) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801073)

This is just a hidden bail out of the music industry. They need a viable business model in the modern world.

Unjust (3, Insightful)

MikeRT (947531) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801087)

If they aren't receiving state funds, then the state has no business putting this mandate on private institutions. Then again, this country has a long, sordid history of things like "attractive nuisance laws" like the ones which make people who have pools in their yards put up all sorts of fences to keep kids out of their yard (rather than arresting the kids for trespassing).

Unconstitutional = unreasonable (2, Interesting)

Taibhsear (1286214) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801089)

[R]easonably attempt to prevent the infringement of copyrighted works over the institution's computer and network resources

Well violating the students' constitutional rights seems pretty unreasonable to me, so the whole law is moot IMHO.

Re:Unconstitutional = unreasonable (1)

Aladrin (926209) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801255)

You have a constitutional right to infringe copyrights?

Or maybe you have a constitutional right to use the University's network in any way you wish?

Or maybe you think that 'privacy' applies on private networks and land?

There are plenty of reasons that this won't work as the RIAA wants, but this isn't one of them.

Re:Unconstitutional = unreasonable (1)

Taibhsear (1286214) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801521)

A blanket of 50 John Doe notices of infringement based on IP addresses do not count as valid identification of infringement. It has been refuted many times already.

Or maybe you think that 'privacy' applies on private networks and land?

Yes, that's generally what the terms private and privacy mean.

Re:Unconstitutional = unreasonable (1)

mc900ftjesus (671151) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801617)

The problem is making taxpayers carry the burden of a dying industry to keep their executives well paid, not your delusions of privacy where you've explicitly been told you have none.

Try reading the terms of service you've agreed to before you go for that "unconstitutional" angle so quickly.

Making others do your policing (1)

Killer Eye (3711) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801257)

I hate laws that essentially force others to pick up the bill for a special interest group's policing.

If the RIAA wants universities patrolled, let the RIAA pony up the money. For example, the RIAA could create some kind of contract with universities to have this done, if they really care that much. (Of course, I'd rather the RIAA just go away.)

The role of a university is education, and their budgets are limited enough. The idea that future tuition will probably be hiked to offset this kind of unnecessary expense, is even more disgusting than the idea of monitoring infringement in the first place.

How many institutions of learning can they have? (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25801289)

McCain won Tennessee 60%-39%.

Terrorism (1)

dr_d_19 (206418) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801363)

Ladies and gentlemen, RIAA are the mafia of the 21th century.

Doing the maths (1)

gnasher719 (869701) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801393)

So that is $9.5 million plus $1.5 million per year for Tennessee universities. Tennessee population is about 1/45th of the USA, so a similar program for the hole of the USA would be about $420 million initially plus $62 million per year to "reasonably attempt to prevent copyright infringement" at university campuses. May I say that is an awful lot of money to cover one industry. Wouldn't it be much more worthwhile to invest state money into the prevention of shoplifting, which is a real crime, and creates more damages.

Re:Doing the maths (1)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801509)

How will it cost to give the mail cops more real cop powers?

Tennessee? (2, Insightful)

wcrowe (94389) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801427)

At first I thought, "With the economy being what it is, I can't believe that a state would pass such an expensive statute." Then I remembered that Tennessee is the home of Nashville. So perhaps that is why the RIAA has so much pull there.

Best of luck RIAA (4, Interesting)

einer (459199) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801459)

As an IT professional working at one of these TN universities I can report that the budget crunch currently going on in education (the aggresive growth policies that served the endowments so well in the past were mostly real estate driven) will limit the resources these new directives are allocated. In fact, we're actually considering open source solutions for the first time since I've worked here. Pretty sure the RIAA's financial well being is not at the top of our list.

ennessee Budget Shortfall Could Reach $800 Million (3, Interesting)

dhwebb (526291) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801481)

Foundering first quarter revenue collections indicate that Tennessee's state budget shortfall could reach $800 million, Gov. http://www.topix.com/state/tn/2008/11/bredesen-tennessee-budget-shortfall-could-reach-800-million [topix.com]

Re:ennessee Budget Shortfall Could Reach $800 Mill (1, Funny)

dhwebb (526291) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801495)

Hell, we can't even afford the T in Tennessee.

Maybe they can bum some change from Paulson (1)

REALMAN (218538) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801551)

If they apply for some of that bailout money, (let's say a billion or two), Then they can afford to stop all internet traffic on campuses and send their students to Internet Cafe's to do their downloading. They could also hire a campus employee to go out wardriving to find all the hotspots and post them in the student rec. centers so students can download the latest Milli Vanilli hit on someone elses network :P

Corporate welfare at its best! (Or worst?) (1)

sydbarrett74 (74307) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801561)

Subject says it all....

Residential network = ISP? (2, Interesting)

anexium (591672) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801603)

If this is with regard to a residential network provided by the universities (and not the university network as such), wouldn't the provision of this put them in the same position of an ISP, and therefore protected by the same regulations that stop ISPs getting sued for the content that goes across their network?

Hit them where it hurts (3, Insightful)

chord.wav (599850) | more than 5 years ago | (#25801611)

Stop buying music and movies. Yes that includes the ones in iTunes.
No mattr how loud you complain, if you still are giving them your money, nothing will get solved.

You have to be the change you want to see in the world - Ghandi

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>