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."
"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???
When I went through school DARE was just getting started. Everybody was jumping behind it as a way to target kids right in the classroom early-on and say "Don't do drugs." However, DARE has been an awesome failure. Some of the buggest potheads that I know sat right next to me in those classes, parroting the lines that "Officer Jim" told us.
I believe that this program will have similar results; Little Suzie says "I'll never download, that's bad" at school then goes home and gets the whole new Britney Spears album because, ya know, it's free!
Also, this part is particularly interesting:
The ''fair use" doctrine allows the public to use copyrighted material for educational purposes. One can use another's work to parody, review, or critique that material. You can even legally swap material, as long as it's not for commercial gain, said Seltzer. ''People tape movies on their VCRs and swap it with friends without getting arrested for piracy," she said.
so, by that logic, all P2P is legal. I'm not getting any commercial by sharing files out, nor are the people that I download from. What's the diff in having 3 friends that swap movies off HBO or 3 Billion friends swapping some AC/DC albums?
I Pledge Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
Kids are some of the sneakiest people alive. (This is not open for debate. We were all kids once.)
Even little ones are all over music/movie piracy. They already know the thrill of getting something for free rather than asking your parents to buy it.
That thrill and the associated material benefit far outweighs anything the RIAA/MPAA or teachers can do to endorse a strict policy of legal distribution.
The coolest voice ever.
> "Students learn to repeat the program's motto:
;-)
> ''If you don't pay for it, you've stolen it."
Ahem, if I *tried* to pay my gf for sex she'd more more than a little P.O.ed.
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.
Of course it doesn't cover all aspects of copyright law. They seem to have forgotten about section 107 (fair use).
Ryan Kennedy opposes comm
What's weird is that I actually use to believe those words, but now that I'm an adult it's like Santa and the Easter Bunny. What happened? Where did I lose faith and why? Are those corporate liars proud of the fact that they made me doubt those words?
Say it again... slowly... with feeling.
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.
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.
Anyway, I don't see anything new here at all. Yeah, there's way too much corporate influence in the classroom - so let's talk about all those schools that have replaced milk machines and cafeteria lines with soda and sandwich vending machines and made the Nike swoosh part of their campus decor.
When I was in the sixth grade I was grounded from recesses for weeks because I started a petition for longer recesses. an innocent bit of play snowballed within a day and soon there were dozens of handwritten copies of my petition circulating in classrooms. When they found out it was me who started it, rather than take the opportunity to demonstrate real world governenace, I instead got a lecture and made to write something stupid like "I will not create disturbances in class." Which, ironically, means I really did get a lesson in the real world - unfortunately, not the real world as we had been told in the classroom (petitioning the government, speaking out, etc). Obviously this real lesson had a lasting effect on me, as I still can't remember what it was I was supposed to write but the message sent still rings clear 30 years later: don't try to buck the man or you'll get stepped upon.
This program is certain to spawn a new generation of adults with similar memories. Indoctrination of this sort is doomed to fail as soon as the child begins to realize she can think for herself.
Now, getting back to those school lunches and corporate sports programs...
It isn't political because the program is simply teaching people what the law is.
No. From the article: "Students learn to repeat the program's motto: 'If you don't pay for it, you've stolen it.'" That's just wrong for too many reasons to count.
How to solve most of our problems: 1.Lots of nuclear plants. 2.Cure aging.
Many of the "Founding Fathers" - Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Paine, Franklin, and Madison, to name a few - were Deists, Unitarians, or in some other way explictly disagreed with Christian dogma.
The "Treaty of Peace and Friendship" with Tripoli, written duing the Washington administration, states that "the Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion."
To an atheist, it's clearly unconstitutional to have the state push people to make a clearly untrue statement (that God exists).
Fortunately, we have a constitution that makes it clear that it is not the state's job to judge the truth or falsity of the proposition "God exists". Unfortunately we have a surplus of Christian nutcases who are incapable of accepting the plain text of the First Amendment.
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood