British Schoolkids Get Copyright Education
Krafty Koder writes "The Register reports that British school children will be indoctrinated in copyright law , in a scheme backed by the music industry, as part of the government sponsored Music Manifesto initiative. In response, kuro5hin have posted an open letter on this issue." The U.S. has its own version.
Half of our kids can't even spell, now we're wasting time on this crap?
I like muppets.
I think it would be great if someone made a list of such things that we could xerox and pass out to all the students so they can be PROPERLY educated.
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
"We don't need no education"
Our educational system? Sure copyright is an issue that is controversial, and piracy is a problem, however I don't think that it is a good idea for corporations to be the ones funding this type of thing. It compromises the educational integrity of dealing with the subject subjectively from both sides. I wouldn't be surprised if in the future someone gets suspended for wearing a "bit torrent" t-shirt on anti-piracy day or something...
"And I'm right. I'm always right, but in this case I'm just a bit more right than I usually am." - Linus Torvalds
Teaching kids about copyright law, ok fine, nothing wrong with knowing what the law is.
Teaching kids the music industry's idea of copyright law, very, very bad idea.
Saying that being against piracy is being against sharing is exactly the same sort of BS that organizations like the RIAA use is exactly the same sort of BS that organizations like the RIAA use.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Short version: if we're going to find time and money to educate our children on music copyright, how much more important is it to include music in our children's educations?
Because the real agenda is to teach children that the publishing industry is the only way that artists can be "legitimate", and that the creations must be owned by corporations and "protected" by "intellectual property" laws. It has nothing to do with teaching why-- rather, the point is to teach the kids not to ask why.
The Attitude Adjuster, I hate me, you can too.
The music industry is not dumb enough to believe that a simple class will cause a drop in downloading. I believe the motivation here is to take away a child's ability to plead ignorance on the minutiae of the copyright laws, so the record industry can better sue them.
We all have heard of that little girl whose family was forced to pay thousands of dollars because she downloaded a few harmless songs. Now, the record industry aims to take away the "kids don't know better" loophole, and wash their hands of responsibilty. "Hey, you broke the law. It says so right here and here, in the packet we gave you. Now we're going to make your family pay thousands of dollars for your little error."
It makes sense to me. You get a five minute time out for kicking your brother, and your parents lose a weeks salary for you downloading a three minute pop song.
Does anyone imagine how guilty and horrible that little girl must feel, for costing her family so much money? Apparently not the record industry. She is to be only another wide eyed lamb sacrificed upon the altar of cold money.
I don't see how anyone could be against legal education in schools.
Do you see how people could be against misleading and inaccurate legal education in schools? That is precisely what will happen if we let the RIAA design the course material, which is precisely what they are doing.
The proper response when RIAA people start pushing schools to do this is for the schools to push back by saying, "You want us to educate people on copyright law? Sure thing - but *WE* are designing the course material then, not you. And well teach it to them accurately, including it's history, and why it was created, and including how you keep pushing copyright terms longer and longer... now, are you sure you want kids educated about this sort of thing...."
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.