Slashdot Mirror


MPAA Funds School Programs In Copyright Dogma

Matthew Skala writes "This article from the Boston Globe describes the 'What's The Diff?' program, in which U.S. students and teachers can win prizes by learning to endorse the MPAA's version of copyright law. They're using volunteer labour from Junior Achievement - not an organization I would have expected to see doing this kind of thing. I guess I'll have to move its card over in my mental Illuminati: New World Order game."

7 of 514 comments (clear)

  1. Onwards and upwards... by Space+cowboy · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Yet Darrell Luzzo, senior vice president of Junior Achievement, defends the industry's antipiracy program by saying it's not meant to cover all aspects of copyright law. Rather, the idea is to encourage student debate. ''We are learning ways to enhance classroom discussions."

    I don't know, back in the dim and distant past when I were a lad, it was considered harmful to use brainwashing and coercion in education. I guess that's the price you pay for progress though. I hear they're moving onto aversion therapy next - "just put this down your pants lad, no it doesn't matter where, trust us, we know what we're doing..." ZZZAAAPPP

    Doesn't this also count as political education - I mean the MPAA/RIAA are making a big deal about buying senators and so on to fight their "cause". You'd have thought they couldn't have their cake and eat it!

    Oh well, it's a damn sight better than the UK at the moment anyway, with the mad blind fascist Josef Blunkett attempting to ID all and sundry :-( Think yourselves lucky as they ZZZAAAPPP you...

    Simon
    --
    Physicists get Hadrons!
  2. In the words of Pink Floyd by Kulaid982 · · Score: 5, Interesting


    "We don't need no education, we don't need no thought control"

    --

    Isn't it interesting how you come to recognize posters based solely on their sigs???
  3. Re:Outrageous by GoofyBoy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Actually this would only effect really dumb sheep-like teens.

    The smarter ones;
    1. Will see the $ advantages of downloading stuff.
    2. Will question what teachers feed them ("Is it stealing?" or "Is this worse than speeding like everyone does?" or "Don't we have something better to do?")
    3. Will just do it for the cash and prizes but not really believe in it.
    4. Will just see through corporate crap and start to make fun of it.
    5. Will look at the arguments against stealing from the pockets of artists and ask themselves "Does this person look like he/she is hurting?"

    --
    The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
  4. Effective teaching by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I think that one of the problems with this sort of thing (referencing mainly from drugs are bad things) is that just just block it out. Its like advertising- im not saying adverts never effect me, but the average person sees what, several hundred adverts a day? 99% of them they just ignore.

    I remember one time in high school (several years ago) we had a policeman come in to talk to us about drugs. He actually talked to us sensibly, rather than enforcing a "drugs are evil and if you use them youll go to hell" idea.

    I cant rememeber most of it, but I do remember 2 things he said: (which is pretty impressive)

    a) if you want to do drugs, fine. Do NOT do heroin and cocaine. They will fuck you up.
    b) Dont inhale sprays. Some girl sprayed aerosol directly into the back of her throat, and the cold caused her throat to contract and she suffocated.

    So there you go. Teaching kids the IMPORTANT things, rather than blanket bombing everything you dont like.

  5. What "great examples" to get into school... by toriver · · Score: 4, Interesting

    MPAA, is that the organization which represents the movie studios that are constantly copying the plots etc. of each other? The "let's make a James Bond movie with Vin Diesel and call it XxX" guys?

    Bah.

    What next, will they have NAMBLA come and tell the kids their interpretation of age-of-consent laws? How about letting the KKK educate the kids about how laws regarding blacks should be?

  6. Re:Outrageous by danila · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is no longer outrageous. You can try it too if you have the money. The society no longer thinks this is ridiculous, they think it's alright, because the corporation is doing it (technically MPAA is not a corporation, but you get my point). Want to promote genetic engineering and stem cell therapy - fund some biology lessons. Want to oppose genetic engineering and stem cell therapy - fund some biology lessons. All you need is money. And political power (just in case), which can be bought rather cheaply.

    What the USA needs is a bunch of revolutionaries (soon to be branded terrorists), who would compensate their lack of money with personal energy and motivation. Kind of another King. EFF is not adequate to the threat, they are too soft. Someone should start a militant wing of EFF, with bombs, assassinations, self-immolations and stuff. This isn't some radical idea - everyone is doing it (IRA, Al Quaeda, etc.) - a front (party, organisation) for legitimate action and a group of fighters.

    --
    Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
  7. Re:The smell of misinformation in the morning by spellraiser · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This is the kind of stuff that makes me want to just rant and rant. I will, however, try to restrain myself.

    The most important question here, in my view, is this: Why the hell are corporations and 'business groups' teaching classes to kids anyway? Well, obviously because they see an advantage in it. So let me rephrase that: Why the hell are they allowed to do this? This is basically nothing more than advertising delivered directly at the kids, and hey, get this: They can't ignore it, because it's happening in their school, which they are legally required to attend!

    There is something fundamentally wrong when publically funded, mandatory education is subsidized by private corporations in order to spread their own agendas. And 'best' of all, it's usually the poorest schools that end up simply needing to do something like this, just to afford basic necessities.

    Allright, so this has probably been a rant. But it needed to be said. Just one more thing: Just how is this class learning? How can anything so biased, so value-laden, be classified as learning? I for one, am obviously a little to unimaginative to see that ...

    --
    I hear there's rumors on the Slashdots