Slashdot Mirror


Uni Students Slammed For Music Swapping

jomaree writes "The SMH Online reports that Sony, EMI and Universal will be in the Federal Court today, in an attempt to stop students using uni computers to swap music files. Michael Speck, the director of Music Industry Piracy Investigations, is quoted as follows: 'And we're not talking about one track here, one track there,' he said. 'We're talking piracy, significant examples of piracy.' By contrast, Sydney Uni says it knows of one student with a handful of files on a website, which does actually sound quite a bit like one track here, one track there."

38 of 419 comments (clear)

  1. Good for them. by Ilan+Volow · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Harsh, but preferable to some jerk putting DRM in my hardware.

    --
    Ergonomica Auctorita Illico!
    1. Re:Good for them. by flatt · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If that's how it would work, that would be great but don't you think they'd like to give you DRM anyway?

    2. Re:Good for them. by gad_zuki! · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > Harsh, but preferable to some jerk putting DRM in my hardware.

      What makes you think these two are mutually exclusive? The university, ideally, should be fighting to control their computers, in service of its students, as they wish without outside influences

      Do you really think devulging personal information, sniffing packets, and reporting this to an outside authority without a warrant is good? Do you really think DRM will be put on hold because some student gets busted as an, "example?"

      I seriously doubt it. This is one of the many hard-armed tactics the record companies use. Its not a solution and certainly does not make DRM less appealing to the PC and content industry.

    3. Re:Good for them. by KDan · · Score: 4, Informative

      You live in a dreamworld mate. The universities will bend over and take it in the arse, rather than risk a lawsuit. Especially if they're public-funded. They might let things happen as long as it's not something public that anyone is aware of, but as soon as there's the slightest whiff of a lawsuit coming their way, they'll shut it all down pronto.

      I speak from experience. In Oxford we had this great Gnutella clone called OxTella - ran on the 100Mbit/10Mbit LAN, so it was damn fast and good, and across all of Oxford. Then the RIAA sent a letter about some AIM file sharing to one of the colleges, some idiotic IT college officer sent out a mail to the entire college about it instead of keeping quiet and the next issue of the college newspaper had a big headline about it, and man, you never saw hundreds of nodes go down faster.

      The universities are purveyors of education, not filesharing. They won't jeopardise the first to provide the latter.

      Daniel

      --
      Carpe Diem
    4. Re:Good for them. by Hittite+Creosote · · Score: 3, Insightful
      The university, ideally, should be fighting to control their computers, in service of its students, as they wish without outside influences

      Yes, and the first thing they should do is kick the bandwidth wasting hogs off. Some people are trying to use the network to do research, study - the stuff they're paid or paying to do. Not be hampered by those treating a degree as a three year holiday, and sitting in their rooms downloading music rather than going to lectures. It's yet another reason why the researchers are happy when all the students go away - the network speeds up noticeably.

  2. Uni? by Ozlore+Electorov · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Seriously, people. If you're going to submit a story, please bother to spell out the words, even the long ones.

    1. Re:Uni? by yobbo · · Score: 4, Funny

      Here in Australia, if someone says the whole word they sound like a complete wanker. Trust me.

  3. Uni Students? by shr3k · · Score: 4, Funny

    Yeah, it sucks for Uni students. I wonder how it will affect Poly students?

    1. Re:Uni Students? by phaze3000 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yeah, those crazy Aussies with their 'barbies' (not anti-feminist dolls) and their 'tinnies' (not canned food).

      How dare they violate the colourful English language in such a way, an honourable language which for centuries has been at the centre of trade and commerce? Their pathetic Australian dialogue, in my judgement at least, can never claim to match up to that of those in dear old blighty! If only there was a licence for the use of English, it would surely be revoked!
      --
      Blaming GW Bush for the Iraq war is like blaming Ronald McDonald for the poor quality of food.
  4. Sue those theives! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Sue those university students for all that they're worth!! ...
    They don't have anything? ..
    oh.

    1. Re:Sue those theives! by phorm · · Score: 4, Funny

      Sorry son, the RIAA won the court case... I'm afraid we'll have to take your hall pass, your beer cap, and all your boxes of Macaroni and Cheese.

      Meanwhile, they will probably be kicked out of the University and possibly blacklisted at others.
      <sarcasm> Yup... ruin a few college kids lives, the RIAA is really going to win a lot in this legal battle.</sarcasm>

  5. cooperation is mandatory by Sneftel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Australia's major record companies, Sony, EMI and Universal, are acting on suspicions that students, and possibly staff, are using the universities' computers to swap digital music files. The industry says the three universities have not divulged information, but that others have co-operated.

    Ah, great. BSA-style enforcement that tosses the ol' "guilty until proven innocent" mythos out the window. The alarmist in me wonders how long it'll be before consumers are forced to prove their compliance with copyright, or submit to "music collection audits".

    --
    The opinions stated herein do not necessarily represent those of anybody at all. Deal with it.
  6. Website is slow.. here is the full text by vivek7006 · · Score: 5, Informative
    Print Article: It's war on a generation of cyber pirates


    Print this article | Close this window

    It's war on a generation of cyber pirates
    ByAmanda Morgan
    February 18 2003

    The recording industry has launched its most aggressive offensive yet against illegal music swapping over the internet.

    In the Federal Court in Sydney today, record companies will try to seize evidence of song swapping by students using the computer networks of the universities of Sydney, Melbourne and Tasmania.

    Record labels in the United States and Europe have warned the world's top 1000 companies they must stop illegal music swapping on their networks or face legal action.

    Australia's major record companies, Sony, EMI and Universal, are acting on suspicions that students, and possibly staff, are using the universities' computers to swap digital music files. The industry says the three universities have not divulged information, but that others have co-operated.

    Michael Speck, the director of Music Industry Piracy Investigations, which tracks swapping on behalf of the Australian record industry, believes the illegal file trading is significant.

    "And we're not talking about one track here, one track there," he said. "We're talking piracy, significant examples of piracy."

    The University of Sydney says it knows of one student who established a website with a handful of songs for swapping on its system. It has "isolated the website, and will hand over the evidence at an appropriate time", a spokesman said.

    There are hundreds of thousands of song files on personal computers worldwide. They are "swapped" for free using special software, robbing artists and their record companies of royalties.

    But the president of the NSW Council for Civil Liberties, Cameron Murphy, said the industry was wrong to target students.

    "The focus of these organisations should be on people who are running or pirating music for clear commercial benefit," he said. "I don't think there is any benefit to the community in prosecuting individuals who do this as a one-off. I mean, we'd have half the students in Australia in jail."

    Mr Murphy also questioned whether the universities should be forced into the role of policing their students.

    Mr Speck denied the industry was making an example of the universities. "Somebody gets caught being involved in a wrongdoing and they utter, 'We're not the only ones, why are we here?' Well, you got caught."

    This story was found at: http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/02/17/10453305 39310.html

    =252) refR=refR.substring(0,252)+"..."; //--> '; if(navigator.userAgent.indexOf('Mac')!=-1){documen t.write(imgN); }else{ document.write(''+ ''+''+imgN+''); } } document.write(""); //-->
  7. John Q Student had a track... by AntiNorm · · Score: 4, Funny

    By contrast, Sydney Uni says it knows of one student with a handful of files on a website, which does actually sound quite a bit like one track here, one track there

    John Q Student had a track, EIEIO
    And on this track he had a song, EIEIO
    With a "track track" here and a "track track" there
    Here a "track" there a "track" everywhere a "track track"
    John Q Student had a track, EIEIO!

    (God I love having to stay up late to do homework)

    --

    I pledge allegiance to the flag...
    of the Corporate States of America...
  8. Absolutely! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Although putting the perpetrators out of business, destroying the "infrastructure of terrorism" as the Bush adiministration would say, is not without worth, if any advocate of content providers' rights has learned anything over the past few years, it is that, just as Islamic terrorism starts with the corrupt, anti-semitic arab education systems, piracy is also the result of a deeply ingrained culture, and the most effective way to stamp it out is to cut it off at the roots.

    People are always arguing that piracy is somehow reasonable, because "if only there were music available at the price I WANTED to pay, I would buy it, and I wouldn't have to steal it". Try this argument at the convenience store: "I think that bottle of malt liquor is only worth 10 cents, and if you won't sell it to me for 10 cents, I'll steal it". It doesn't work that way. Over the past several hundred years we have replaced the rule of the mob with free markets, which ensure an equitable price for both buyer and seller through the natural interactions of supply and demand. The availability of free stolen products, of course, undermines this market and makes content production ultimately impossible. Some efforts of this type may be necessary initially to restore the rule of law: But remember, if you don't like this kind of intrusion, the best thing to do is stop pirating music right now, let this culture of piracy be destroyed, and allow a market-based system of online music distribution to be established. Once this has happened, heavy-handed enforcement will be unnecessary, and everyone will be able to get what they want for a fair price.

    1. Re:Absolutely! by phorm · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Except I'm Canadian. I pay a rather nice premium on all the recordable media I buy, and they want me to pay more. I don't pirate music either.

      All things considered, I'm paying the RIAA for copying music, ergo any song I download and burn should be considered paid for.

      Oh, and for the record, once again:
      piracy != theft
      Theft=larceny
      The owner is deprived of nothing tangible. There are still just as many CD's on the shelves as there were yesterday. And if all goes well, there will be plenty of crap CD's left on the shelves as people continue to revolt on the monopolism, scare, and crush tactics of the RIAA and their brethren

    2. Re:Absolutely! by MisterMook · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But we all know that won't happen because the current industry model won't allow it to happen. There are too many pockets being lined by inflating prices on music and not enough to lose by keeping prices fixed at their current levels.

      When was the last time you saw the price of music DECREASE besides when all the hair bands went into the discount bin in 91? There isn't a free market in the music industry, there is a price fixing cartel of less than a handful of companies that collectively control most of the music that gets put on shelves.

      Basically they're going against a smoking type arguement. Everyone knows that smoking is bad for you and can have serious consequences, and that music swapping can lead to jail time. If they had made smoking down and out illegal though they would have forced everyone who smoked into an us versus them midnset and pretty much pissed off the general public of "don't kick the common man" mentality. This is exactly what the music industry has done and continues to do, furthermore they shamelessly promote and profit from filesharing in their other corporate faces. It makes them look like asses, and stupid asses at that. Sony Music basically says "don't do anything that our other division, Sony Electronics, makes easy with their huge sales of portable mp3 players." With that kind of corporate logic it's hard to take them seriously.

    3. Re:Absolutely! by DarkVein · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Over the past several hundred years we have replaced the rule of the mob with free markets, which ensure an equitable price for both buyer and seller through the natural interactions of supply and demand.

      This is a poor arguement. While I agree with the sentiment expressed, it is entirely inapplicable to our RIAA/MPAA controlled entertainment industry, and IP in general. I'll explain.

      The idea of a free market applies only to unregulated goods and services. If I patent an idea for providing a good or service, I am temporarily granted power to veto "free market" ideals for the term of the patent. This is so that I have an advantage to capitalize on my exclusive right to a certain good or service. After the patent expires, free market is restored, and anyone may compete with me on price and product.

      Copyright works similarly. Unlike a tangible good or service, dissemination of copyrightable material has always been simple. To encourage creation, competition with creators is "temporarily" suspended. Culture is asked to hold its breath while the economics play out. The free market is suspended, and that "product" may not be aquired anywhere else. Ordinarily this would not be a problem, as an artist could shop around for a better publisher deal for themselves and their fans. The music publishing instustry is oligarchious, however, and runs a racket. [I will not defend this here.] Free market is suspended to give creators an advantage, and their advantage is suspended by an economic force.

      I'm deeply in favor of federal laws that encourage a free market. Present copyright law suspends that market, and RIAA efforts to expand it further are deeply anti-competitive. With whom are they competing? They're competing with the public, and with the force of digital publishing. The RIAA must win legal control of digital publishing, or it will die. I hope and pray to God that it dies. Rent-seekers are a drain on the American culture and economy, and this rent-seeker controls 90% of our music.

      Also, it's pretty fucking arrogant of these recording companys to think that University students would be more interested in Christina Augilera's singing (boobs) than historical music and speeches from periods and places they are studying. University students are classically (and vocally) disdainers of engineered culture [i.e., Monkeys, N~Sync, Linkin Park, Britney]. I'm disgusted that due process and presumption of guilt is suspended so that this dying organization can work its venom.

      I think the RIAA knows that a more decentralized and artistic-centric industry is aching to be birthed from their ashes.

      --

      I'm as mimsy as the next borogove but your mome raths are completely outgrabe.

    4. Re:Absolutely! by 1u3hr · · Score: 3, Informative
      Oh, and for the record, once again:
      piracy != theft
      Theft=larceny

      For that matter:
      copyright infringement != piracy

      "Piracy" is armed robbery on the high seas. How on earth this word got associated with the wholly non-violent act of copying a digital file is beyond me. At least it isn't called "music terrorism" or possession of "musical weapons of mass destruction" (yet).

  9. Quit picking on the poor students... by $$$$$exyGal · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Says the president of the NSW Council for Civil Liberties:

    "I don't think there is any benefit to the community in prosecuting individuals who do this as a one-off. I mean, we'd have half the students in Australia in jail."

    I totally agree. As long as these students are not making money by trading this music, this seems like a real cheap shot. Before you know it, they are going to prosecute college kids for putting a quarter on a string and getting their laundry done for free.

    On the other hand, SHAME ON YOU TODAY'S COLLEGE STUDENTS! If you're going to be engaged in these illicit activities, at least make a minor effort to hide your tracks. That's what college is all about ;-).

    --sex

    --
    Very popular slashdot journal for adul
    1. Re:Quit picking on the poor students... by Evil+Adrian · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So it's ok to violate someone's rights, but only if you only do it a little bit?

      --
      evil adrian
  10. not just about money by Mdog · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's not just an issue of money. It's a question of control.

    The RIAA's accountants know that their profits have increased in the past few years. The RIAA's lawyers know that their profits have increased in the past few years. But there are people out there that are not using officially sanctioned music in officially sanctioned ways at officially sanctioned times with officially sanctioned equipment. That means there are people out there who are not under the control of the company, the mythical "consumer." This cannot be tollerated.

    Microsoft has been making money hand over fist for two decades. Someone installing WinME on three of their computers when they bought one copy is not doing them any harm. If anything, it means fewer copies of Win98 in use, which means less old stuff for them to support. That's good for them. But it means that there are people out there not using the product in the officially sanctioned way on the officially sanctioned number of systems. Microsoft (and Bill Gates in particular) simply cannot deal with the concept of someone not using the product on their terms.

    All of that goes back to one of the fundamental flaws in the capitalist mindset: The consumer. The mythical consumer is not a person. The mythical consumer is a machine that stands on the other side of a cash register and accepts input (products) and returns output (pictures of George Washington). They can be reduced to a mathematical equation of supply and demand. They can be manipulated by marketing. They can be made to fit into nice little cells on a spreadsheet. In short, the consumer can be controlled.

    It fits nicely into the whole financial theory. Passive object Consumer (C) is convinced by active object Marketing Department (M) to purchase passive object Product (P), created by passive objects Employees (E) under the employ of the active object Owner (O). Add it all up, and you get a nice tity profit (n) for the Owner.

    (C + M) + P(E) = O(n)

    (A very efficent method, eh?)

    There's just one problem: Not all human beings are passive objects C. Humans are not a mathematical equation. The equation works when it is not possible for a person to function otherwise. You force them into playing the role of C or E, and the equation comes out nicely. Everying is predictable, profitable, and controllable.

    But as soon as something comes along that threatens the stability and controllability of that equation, panic mode sets in. The printed book would be the death of learning. TV would be the death of radio. VCRs would be the death of movies. DAT would be the death of radio. Cable would be the death of movies. E-books will be the death of learning. The Internet will be the death of civilization. And so on. A little control slips away, and the end is nigh, defend the System to the last lawyer.

    No one likes uncertainty (except possibly Shrodinger), and no one likes surprises (except at birthdays). It's not your money that the RIAA or the MPAA or Microsoft want. It's your passivity. They want to know that you can be controlled, not because they want power or greed or world domination but because then you are predictable, and they can wrap their minds around something predictable. Everyone likes things to be predictable. Everyone likes knowing where their next meal is coming from.

    So what do we do? Don't be a consumer. Don't be passive. Don't be swayed by marketing. Don't be a part of a machine, however well intentioned and genuinely useful it is (and it is). Most importantly: Don't take your business elsewhere. That doesn't work, it only makes your life more difficult. Saying "we'll just use open source software" doesn't do anything about the continued growth of draconian attempts at regaining control with their collateral damage. Turn and take the issue head on, at its core level: The law.

    1. Re:not just about money by DarkVein · · Score: 3, Insightful
      They're not trying to "control" you. It's nothing sinister -- they are trying to control their distribution channels, something that is perfectly within their rights.

      I like the possesive adjective. Yes, it's perfectly within their rights to control their distribution channel.

      The University's internetworking uplink is not the RIAA's distribution channel, but the RIAA wants jurisdiction over it. Let's forget that part, for the moment. I have something much better to say.

      I have absolutely no problem with the RIAA trying to control their distribution channel. They have absolutely no right to control my distribution channel. The RIAA's biggest fear is that people will realize how ever-so-fucking-little they need the publishers now. If the RIAA can control digital distribution channels [mine, yours, your school's, the government's...], then it's their distribution channel, and you still need them.

      My sentiment is "Fuck off", I've got a Free Market to engage in.

      --

      I'm as mimsy as the next borogove but your mome raths are completely outgrabe.

    2. Re:not just about money by Evil+Adrian · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Well, nobody has the right to distribute THEIR material without THEIR permission. Since everybody and their brother is fucking them over and pirating their music, they're going to do what they can to fight back, and I don't see how anyone could blame them.

      Like I've said before, it's not fair for the vast majority of people to pirate things, and then piss and moan when the people they are ripping off push back.

      --
      evil adrian
  11. On behalf of everyone by Timesprout · · Score: 4, Funny


    They are "swapped" for free using special software, robbing artists and their record companies of royalties
    On behalf of everyone and as a gesture of goodwill I would like to volunteer to try and make it up to Kylie for this heinous crime. Someone else can do the record companies

    --
    Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
    What truth?
    There is no dupe
  12. error in the article by Niadh · · Score: 4, Insightful
    The line:

    There are hundreds of thousands of song files on personal computers worldwide. They are "swapped" for free using special software, robbing artists and their record companies of royalties.


    Should read:

    There are hundreds of thousands of record companies worldwide. They are using special contract software, robbing artists of their royalties.

    1. Re:error in the article by DarkVein · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Wow, you're right. Instead of going to Sony, they could go to EMI and get... the same contract, damn.

      Well, I guess they could go to Warner Musi... damn, same contract.

      I know! They could go to Epic an... FUCK!

      Classically, it's called an oligopoly, and can thought of as an oligarchy. Under Free Market laws, it's called a Cartel. As an artist, if you want exposure, you have the same choice under a dozen different names.

      --

      I'm as mimsy as the next borogove but your mome raths are completely outgrabe.

    2. Re:error in the article by 1u3hr · · Score: 3, Insightful
      The artists had the option to not sign that contract, but they signed it. Therefore they agreed to the terms of the contract, and they are not getting ripped off in any way shape or form, unless the record company is violating that contract.

      A farmer in Bangladesh needs money to buy seed, signs a contract with the moneylender that makes his family indentured servants until he pays it back, which he cannot because of the ruinous interest and the low prices the moneylender (who is also the only grain purchaser) pays. He agreed to teh terms, no one was ripped off, justice prevails.

      Legal != just.

  13. Monash University by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    A staff member was suspended from Monash University (in the outer suburbs of Melbourne) a few weeks ago for "alleged infringement of copyrights in sound recordings and song lyrics published on the staff member's home page". Apparently this led to a large amount of co-workers' computers being forcibly searched as well. No other suspensions have happened, but a lot of people have become quite nervous. It's believed that this action was at the behest of ARIA, which is basically the Australian equivalent of the RIAA.

    Now, many of us have recently been advised by our superiors that we will "infringe copyright" even by doing such things as copying our own CDs or encoding them to mp3 files and bringing them into work. Also, our networks are being regularly scanned for machines running file-sharing applications.

    It seems that they're gearing up to instituting a policy where having a machine that has transferred large amounts of data and has been seen listening on certain well-known port numbers will soon constitute grounds for having the contents of its hard drive searched.

    1. Re:Monash University by Boiling_point_ · · Score: 3, Informative
      Not many Australians realise that we don't have the same "fair use" rights that Americans and other nationals do.

      We have no legal right to rip mp3s from our own legal CDs. We have no legal right to backup CDs for self-insurance. Check it out (374KB PDF).

      Hell - I'm probably infringing Copyright by quoting this paragraph from the Australian Copyright Council PDF I linked to above:

      Making a backup copy of a CD will involve making a reproduction of the music, lyrics and sound recordings on that CD. The right to reproduce the work is one of the exclusive rights of the owners of copyright in those items. You may not legally make a back up copy of a CD when the CD contains material that is protected by copyright unless you have permission from the owner of copyright or a special exception applies to your use.
      --
      "If you create user accounts, by default, they will have an account type of Administrator with no password." KB Q293834
  14. In Other News by nihilogos · · Score: 4, Funny

    Publishers Wiley, Springer-Verlag, Prentice Hall and others have indicated that they intend to pursue legal action in order to stop the piracy of books in Australian universities.

    "It's not just a few students lending a few novels here and there" aaid spokesperson I.L. Douche. "Some campuses have an entire building filled with books which they lend out to anybody."

    --
    :wq
  15. Incredible claim by SiliconEntity · · Score: 4, Insightful

    By contrast, Sydney Uni says it knows of one student with a handful of files on a website...

    Are you trying to imply that unauthorized file sharing almost never occurs at universities? Don't make me laugh! At least in the United States there are uncounted gigabytes devoted to this activity. Many universities have had problems with network bandwidth due to file sharing. It's a lot more than "one student with a handful of files"! How credible do you hope to be when you make claims like this?

  16. Re:Pirates taking food from my kids mouths. by WhiteBandit · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Not to troll, but if you're losing money because of these pirates, wouldn't it be easier to go out and get a real job where you are guaranteed to make money, rather then having people steal your music everytime you release it, or wasting massive amounts of cash on lawyers to help prosecute them?

    Just think, if most artists today did this, then there'd be nothing left to pirate and we wouldn't be in this position. ;)

  17. I love the psuedo-intellectuals.. by Song+for+the+Deaf · · Score: 3, Insightful
    ...who go on long rants (and manage to somehow include microsoft ?) to justify MUSIC PIRACY.

    what i don't understand is why so many people are using their considerable talents and intellect to create arguments FOR, and technology TO rip off some of the most harmless people in this country- musicians. Way to go, guys, hurt a group of people who do no harm to the environment or society, and have done nothing but enhance your lives.

    I can't believe the demonization of the musicians in general, so everyone can not only feel not guilty about music piracy, but you can convince yourself that you're doing a valuable public service as well.

    so let me ask you, MP3 traders, you who are so socially conscious, do you know who is really ripping you off for their own diabolical ends? Why aren't you going after who's really in control of money and powerin our country? What are you doing to thwart them?

    it's been proven that when the music industry rips people off intelligent, comitted people can make them pay for it. That's how you do it, that's how you make a real change.

    when you're done with the record industry what are you going to do steal from the 'real' man? oh that's right- nothing...that would take effort and commitment, and let's face it, making a REAL change in this world just isn't as fun as watching your downloads complete.

    Warez by any other name...

  18. Re:Pirates taking food from my kids mouths. by syrinx · · Score: 5, Funny

    Lars? Is that you?

    --
    Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.
  19. Federal Student Privacy Laws... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
    In the U.S. there is a federal student privacy law called "Family Education Rights and Privacy Act" (FERPA) which higher education institutions take pretty seriously. I believe it'd be a violation of that law to reveal student information to RIAA. It's so bad that we had to examine our logging policy to review who had access to logs and what they revealed about a student to ensure that FERPA wasn't being violated.

    But we (I work in IT at a college) *do* have policies against using our equipment for breaking the law, and copyright infringement is specifically listed. And if we catch them, we'll nail them. All the RIAA needs to do is note the date/time and IP and we can trace that back to a specific student and disciplinary procedures WILL happen. Problem is, the RIAA doesn't get personal satisfaction. Just like when someone e-mails abuse@ and we reply "We are investigating and will take appropriate action. However, FERPA prevents us from sharing with you the results of our investigation and any disciplinary action." It pisses the complainer off and it's to no good end because we *do* act on these complaints and if a student is violating our terms, they get disciplined and sometimes expeled.

  20. Universities are a haven for piracy by jedrek · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm probably gonna get slammed for this, too bad.

    Universities (and higher education in general) are havens for piracy. File/application swapping among stundents is the norm, but that's been going on for years and I don't think it's what anti-piracy groups have a problem with. They fear one thing: bandwidth.

    The concern is two-pronged:

    1. Students come to school and suddenly get hooked up to a fat pipe. Megabit-speed internet connectivity in dorms and computer labs. Little Johnny freshman sets up a couple of movies to download on edonkey and leaves for the weekend. During that weekend his 1mbps/1mbps pipe is almost saturated uploading. Johnny gets his movies and, before watching and deleting them, manages to share them with 200 other users.

    Home users are usually much more aware of what's going on, maybe even more ignorant of their options. It's hard to stay ignorant when your dorm buddy's always finding new ways to download stuff.

    2. Students working in computer science deparments setting up pirate sites. While P2P piracy is huge, traditional 'warez scene' piracy - while reaching less people directly - is probably just as big. It's hard to run a warez site from a private company, people are going to wonder where all the bandwidth is going. But slip that site into a university network, with it's goverment subisidized pipes and it's terabyte-class monthly transfers and it's just a pebble in a pond. With full access to the equipment, students can reroute traffic, shape other traffic to give their 'users' maximum transfers. They can make systems disapear to all faculty computers, or even all on-campus computers, just to cover their tracks.

    Almost all of the top warez distribution sites I know (I'm talking WHQ and regional HQs for major groups) are run on university pipes. The rest are hidden among other major bandwidth hogs. (VoIP companies and the like)

    Or, maybe the anti-piracy posse is just paranoid.

  21. Re:Forgotten economics by God!+Awful+2 · · Score: 3, Insightful


    College students by nature dont have much money. A poor college student wasnt going to buy the cd anyways, so their are no lost royalties.

    This oft-repeated argument has got to be the biggest pile of steaming dung that I have heard. Poor, starving students sitting in their $5,000 dorm rooms, sharing music on their $2,000 computers, all the while ignoring their $10,000 education, are always complaining about the price of $15 CDs.

    I, for one, am not afraid to admit it. I have pretty much stopped buying CDs, not because of file sharing but because I already have 300 or so. I reckon I bought half of those -- 150 frigging CDs -- while I was in university. A lot of those I bought used. A lot of them were Christmas gifts. Some of them were purchased with money I earned by working. Yes, WORKING!!!

    And you know what? The money I paid for those 150 CDs still doesn't compare to the cost of one semester of tution.

    If I hadn't been an honest person, the music industry would have lost out on over $1,500 during my college days. Please don't ignore the fact that a lot of people don't particularly like concerts. They tend to be expensive, the sound quality is usually poor, and the musicianship is often inferior to the album. I have spent much more on CDs than I ever would on concerts.

    -a