Librarians to the Rescue

Duke Machesne writes "Citing concerns over materials being distributed to American students by the BSA, MPAA, and RIAA's evil minions, the American Library Association will begin distributing its own, more balanced material this winter. The material will deal with insignificant and oft-overlooked details like fair use. More information on Wired News."

Comments

They're taking on who?

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, I guess no more jokes about meek librarians....

Go librarians!

[Elpacoloco]

Apparently, publishers don't like libraries. It decreases sales of their book.

However, it massively accelerates research. Clearly a good thing.

(Mod me down, this post is stupid.)

Re:Go librarians!

[Anonymous Coward]

When money is on the line, companies tend to get cutthroat with their policies and how they deal with free organizations.

Its pretty sad if you ask me.

Re:Go librarians!

[michaeltoe]

We barely used our libraries at school, we usually got our information off the web.

This wasn't because the information in the libraries was bad (actually, it had a lot of good stuff), but as high school students we were generally lazy.

Better than college though, where publishers will force people to buy whole new editions of math books just because they changed the order of the problems at the end of each chapter.

Re:Go librarians!

[wfberg]

Apparently, publishers don't like libraries. It decreases sales of their book.

On the other hand, it massively decreases incentives to set up efficient second hand marketplaces for books. After all, first doctrine means the publisher never gets money for "used" books getting read by their new owners anyway.
And if a library doesn't offer the latest Stephen King, romance novel or in a nutshell, a lot of people end up buying a new copy..

Having said that, they're always working their evil little ways to get libraries to pay for lending out books or having copying machines.. When you have a dead poet's estate prohibiting a poetry festival from "performing" his poems, you know the system's gone mad.

Re:Go librarians!

[jesterzog]

However, it massively accelerates research. Clearly a good thing.

Not to mention literacy, which presumably sustains sales of books in the long term. Imagine what it'd be like if anyone who wanted to read had to pay.

Re:Go librarians!

[Anonymous Coward]

Better than college though, where publishers will force people to buy whole new editions of math books just because they changed the order of the problems at the end of each chapter.

That explains why the end-of-chapter problems never made any sense in the way they were ordered. I swear it pissed me off to no end when they were trying to work a concept and they put "easy-easy-moderate-easy-you'd better know the quirks of the material to get this one-easy" as the order of the questions.

Re:Go librarians!

[kfg]

When you have a dead poet's estate prohibiting a poetry festival from "performing" his poems, you know the system's gone mad.

Indeed. Anyone who's ever been to an open mike night knows that in a sane world it would be the poet who would be prohibited from reading his own works.

KFG

Re:Go librarians!

[Rob_Warwick]

Imagine what it'd be like if anyone who wanted to read had to pay.

I'm only a couple of episodes into listening to it, but that sounds an awful lot like the Listeners License in Tales From The Afternow.

Re:Go librarians!

[Sparr0]

i tend to use resources on the web to write my papers. then ill go to the library to find the books the web site cites and cite them.

Re:Go librarians!

[Anonymous Coward]

Imagine what it'd be like if anyone who wanted to read had to pay.

We'd have a culture where most people get their information from visual and audio media like television and radio and ignore in-depth analysis found in newspapers and magazines.

Oh.

Re:Go librarians!

[logic hack]

Imagine what it'd be like if anyone who wanted to read had to pay.

Waht are yuo takling abuot? I gte my raedign matreial free adn see no porblem wiht ti.

Re:Go librarians!

[Anonymous Coward]

What planet are you from?

Here on earth, our print media is just as biased and one-sided as our visual and audio media.

Re:Go librarians!

[anagama]

• • Imagine what it'd be like if anyone who wanted to read had to pay.
  >br> We'd have a culture where most people get their information from visual and audio media like television and radio and ignore in-depth analysis found in newspapers and magazines.

Sounds like things wouldn't change at all.

Re:Go librarians!

[Photar]

We obviously need this

Re:Go librarians!

[Anonymous Coward]

Probably download it.....

Re:Go librarians!

[Discoflamingo13]

I think his point was that regardless of how biased or one-sided it was, print media goes farther in examining an issue because of the nature of the medium. It's easier to understand more about a single event (and key supporting events) in ten pages than in 10 minutes of TV coverage.

Re:Go librarians!

[ultranova]

However, it massively accelerates research. Clearly a good thing.

Not for publishers. Research lowers the cost of entering the publishing business, and thus increases competition. The Internet even allows publishing for free - and I don't mean book pirates, but people who upload their own texts for everyone to enjoy. I've read several book-length quality pieces of writing on the Net, and this had certainly decreased my need to buy paper books.

Research threatens established power bases - or, more to the point, the fruits of research in the hands of the general public threaten established power bases - and thus is a bad thing, as far as those in power are concerned. Do you really think that the Internet would had been allowed to happen if the politicians and big business had known beforehand what it would become ?

Freedom is the natural enemy of Power. People freely exchanging information and making their own decisions is the worst nightmare of a politician. People producing and trading with each other is the worst nightmare of a corporate overlord. And everyone having a cheap access to publishing is the worst nightmare of a publisher.

All of which means that we will propably go back to pre-emptive censoring, of needing a prior permission to publish anything, before long. Propably as soon as we get mandatory DRM on our computers. That's the real reason for it...

Re:Go librarians!

[phiwum]

i tend to use resources on the web to write my papers. then ill go to the library to find the books the web site cites and cite them.


Presumably after first reading the relevant text to be sure that it agrees with the paper you've already written.

Of course, even if you do check the original sources like you ought, failing to cite the web site where you originally obtained the information might be a form of plagiarism. Especially if the information is presented in your paper more like the web site presented it and less like the original.

Re:Go librarians!

[Anonymous Coward]

Publishers may not like them but I think writers do.

It's been about 4 years now, but a couple of writers that I was working with that were self-promoting and publishing their books both loved them!

One was a DIY book on driveway repair and the other was yet another getting started with computers book. Both authors wanted to pursue hard-cover editions (at about 6-7 times the soft-cover price) because that is what libraries invariably preferred (had to take their word on that) and they wanted library acceptance beacuse it guaranteed an initial order of several 10,000's throughout the state.

Sigh - in the end both deals fell through.

Re:Go librarians!

[Anonymous Coward]

It's easier to understand more about a single event (and key supporting events) in ten pages than in 10 minutes of TV coverage

Agreed. It also takes quite a bit longer than 10 minutes to read a typical 10-page article (presuming 300 words/page). Print media and broadcast media have very different characterstics, and how we interact with them is only the half of it.

Re:Go librarians!

[Sparr0]

plagiarism or not, its the only resort in classes where the teachers dont allow internet citations

Re:Go librarians!

[phiwum]

plagiarism or not, its the only resort in classes where the teachers dont allow internet citations

If academic dishonesty is your only resort, you might oughta rethink your strategy.

It's much less likely that you would be guilty of plagiarism if you used the web to find allowed sources and then read those sources before writing the paper. Writing the paper based on secondhand comments of original sources and citing the originals without mention of the internet resources used is just dishonest.

Doing so without a very careful reading of the originals would be dishonest and foolish.

Re:Go librarians!

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't believe this post has gone on for so long without this point being disputed. You're right that you should be modded down, because your assertion that "publishers hate libraries" is entirely incorrect.

Publishers LOVE libraries. They see them as free advertisement. For instance, when Jim Baen, owner of BAEN BOOKS, first started releasing some of his books online as "webscriptions" (some even for free as in beer), he stated that he regarded these online eBook sales as the equivalent of library purchases. They don't net him a lot of money (miniscule compared to what he makes from marketing hardcover or paperback books), but they help spread awareness and word of mouth. In the end, it ends up being free advertisement for his dead tree books.

Having a book in a library is similar to when one friend lends a book to another friend and tells him to read it. The publisher doesn't get the book sold multiple times, but it's free word of mouth advertisement. And that new reader can get hooked and become a future buyer. Library sales make up a significant interest for publishers and they LOVE selling to libraries.

Re:Go librarians!

[Anonymous Coward]

My understanding is that DRM is going to fix that shortly. You get first sale doctrine on the crypto'd bit, have to pay for a key.

well

[Anonymous Coward]

don't get too excited slashbots... balance in this case is 80% closer to the RIAA and MPAA side than what you think balanced is. Use your computer for something useful, like reading up on copyright laws, and why we have copyrights.

Re:well

[tomhudson]

For once I agree with an AC.

And not just because to "balance things out", you'd have to push a line that would make all copyright questionable.

The proper way to "balance" this is to not allow the **AA access to the schools. This isn't education, it's propaganda. Let them buy time in the media like every other business.

Re:well

[Igmuth]

But oddly there is a difference bettween then and every other buisness. They are part of the media.

Re:well

[invalid_address]

i agree to the propaganda nature of this:

BSA marketing exec 1: hey, what should we do this year to increase legal software sales?

BSA marketing exec 2: i know! let's infiltrate the schools with some 'educational material' about copyrights, and how they should be reverently followed. 90 some odd years is not enough.

BSA marketing exec 1: sound great, but how are we going to do that?

BSA marketing exec 2: we'll umm, make a cartoon character and have the kids name it, yeah! it will be great

BSA marketing exec 1: what else?

BSA marketing exec 2: we'll have legal work with the teacher's unions to force compliance to instruct the children with our coursework. if that doesn't work, we'll bury them in subpoenas and fines!

in walks a lone librarian.

librarian: your tactics are nefarious and strongarm. we will not allow this without proper perspective.

BSA marketing exec 1: who let this person in here?! security!!!!

there will come a day when this will all be trivial. either that or...

our children will grow up with no capability for creative thought, as that will violate some copyright somewhere somehow, and we know what that leads to.

Re:well

[Anonymous Coward]

No, you have no way of knowing what this will lead to.... ..unless you're violating my patented idea of the subject!!!

Thief!!

Re:well

[kfg]

It is possible to be both a strong supporter of the philosophy of copyright and yet oppose specific copyright law.

Not to mention private interests being allowed to making their case as fact in the public schools without so much as a representative of a counterpoint.

I certainly hope school librarians take up the gauntlet, but my experience suggests that to do so might well endanger their jobs.

KFG

Re:well

[Anonymous Coward]

Let them buy time in the media like every other business.

Uhm, they *are* the media.

Ever noticed how "unfair and unbalanced" all the stories about copyright are? They kinda miss the whole "there's a large section of the population that think the laws go too far " kinda angle.

Look at the latest stories about DVD Jon finding the streaming key for the AirPort Express.. "HACKER CRACKS AIRTUNES ENCRYPTION" .. uh yeah. I guess it's a more interesting headline than "SMART GUY FINDS HIDDEN NUMBER".

I don't have a lot of hope for the world to fix itself in the short term when it comes to this, maybe 2-3 generations from now when people finally realize that just because it happens in a computer, doesn't mean it's magical and special and worthy of 50 extra obscene laws.

By then I'll be long gone.. but of course my copyrights will be in full effect.

Re:well

[tomhudson]

either that or...

our children will grow up with no capability for creative thought, as that will violate some copyright somewhere somehow, and we know what that leads to.

I seem to recall a recent sci-fi short story along those lines in one of the monthy anthologies. Stuff taught from textbooks with all sorts of copyright notices, and you could only be taught material that was he clear property of some copyright holder somewhere, for fear of "submarine lawsuits" for copyright infringement.

Let's hope this is one case where sci-fi is more to provoke thought than to predict the future.

Re:well

[Melantha_Bacchae]

I doubt most slashdot readers are ignorant of copyright laws, the founders distrust of the concept, and the decision to only include copyright in the US Constitution as a carrot to promote innovation.

I imagine most slashdot readers are aware of the abuses of copyright law: the endless extensions, the DMCA, stifling of free speech and fair use, impoverishment of the public domain, the lack of rights for the creators of content (publishers using contracts and work-for-hire to take the copyrights for themselves). All of which are extensively documented on Slashdot.

I imagine most slashdot readers are well aware of campaigns by copyright holders (the publishers) to use them to extort money from mostly innocent people (as few cases go to court and so the allegations of infringement are unproven).

While it has been a while, I imagine at least some slashdot readers remember Microsoft's terroristic marketing campaigns to scare customers into buying too many licenses just to be "safe" from audits.

If you don't, AC, maybe you should use your computer for something "useful". ;)

It is good that libraries are going to be educating youngsters in Fair Use. After all, libraries are the sacred temples of Fair Use.

As for the media sharks, remember the Yahlen? Quit being mean, or your yachts are belong to Mothra!
(To be used in the Queen of Monster's thirty-eight year old War on Mean Terrorists.)
"Godzilla vs. the Sea Monster", 1966

Re:well

[tomhudson]

Good point, both about the media, and about people's (un)critical faculties.

Even now, after SCO has been whacked on the head so many times, the media still don't get it, and buyers still buy their SCO Lottery Tickets..

Who knows, maybe the earth's supply of crack will be exhausted in a generation or two and things will get back to normal (OMG what will the moderators be on by then? Chip-heads?)

Re:well

[DarkMantle]

I would, but I'm afraid that they'll make me pay for reading it after I'm done. 'cause somebody probably copyrighted the copyright laws.

Re:well

[Anonymous Coward]

"And not just because to "balance things out", you'd have to push a line that would make all copyright questionable."

copyrights are not a bad thing....it is just the current interpretation of them (ie 90 years until they expire, if ever). Personally given the choice between following what the **aa groups want and the status quo of easy pirating I choose the status quo as the lesser of two evils. It is just sad that good copy right laws are ignored along with the good will it would recive from ppl like me in favor of tyranical propetual control.

Instead of my support they get spiderman 2 downloaded and unpayed for, and my middle finger.

stendec@gmail.com

Re:well

[JamesKPolk]

Nah, they're right to get excited. The ALA is just another leftist advocacy group and its positions will fall right in line with the usual Slashdot bias.

Re:well

[swillden]

It is possible to be both a strong supporter of the philosophy of copyright and yet oppose specific copyright law.

Given the current copyright law, it's pretty much impossible to be a strong supporter of the US founders' philosophy of copyright and *not* oppose specific copyright law.

The only way you can really support the current copyright system is if you buy into the content producers' notion that copyright is some sort of perpetual, natural and even inalienable right to collect cash for every use, rather than the carefully balanced social contract originally intended.

Re:well

[Flexagon]

This isn't education, it's propaganda.

My kids are past elementary school, but we've had to deal with at least two other equally bogus programs that were nevertheless strongly supported by some of the administrators:

• McDonald's providing arithmetic practice sheets driven by its products and pricing for use as in-class exercises. This would have been fine as a hand-out at its restaurants. The justification was that teachers can always use free teaching materials, whatever the source or motivation.
• The American Heart Association running a fund raising drive disguised as PE and charity work for the organization's direct benefit, but during school hours. This one would have been fine if volunteers had been requested, and if it were held outside of the state-mandated teaching hours.

Much of this nonsense didn't stop, despite numerous complaints from parents, until Consumer Reports wrote up the practice.

The only role that these sorts of things have in the classroom is in a high school level civics style class that discusses why they should not be used in the classroom.

Re:well

[Alsee]

Wow, a strawman attack and you didn't even need to waste time setting up a strawman argument to attack! What a time saver!

balance in this case is 80% closer to the RIAA and MPAA side than what you think balanced is

Are you talking about balance as in giving a fair and honest explanation of existing copyright law, or balanced as in what balanced law should be? Not that it matters because the RIAA/MPAA/BSA fail on both accounts. Their "educational program" is pure propaganda to push an agenda. They have no interest in giving an accurate and balanced picture of copyright law. They ignore or misrepresent any aspect of copyright law which does not support their agenda, and they simplify and overgeneralize any portion of copyright law which does support their agenda.

Oh yes, those eeeevil librarians are dong this to spread disinformation and lies to undercut the MPAA/RIAA/BSA's fair and balanced message. It's all part of the eeeevil librarians' plot to brainwash our children and conquer the world! Muahahahaha!

As for what balance law should be, well things would be a lot closer to balanced if we simply repealed a couple of rotten laws the copyright lobby has bought in the last few years. The DMCA, NET, Sony Bono, AHRA, and one or two others. If we were to include state laws I think there were a few statyes stupid enough to pass Super-DMCA bills, and two that bought into the UCITA.

But of cource that makes me some some evil anti-copyright nutjob because I want good old traditional copyright. A-yup. I'm an evil anachist for wanting the perfectly good laws we used to have.

And actually there's a rather unlikely item I'd like to add to the list of bad copyright law, though I have to stretch waaaaay back to 1976. And what item would that be? TITLE 17 CHAPTER 1 Sec. 107 - Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use.

Yes, that's right, I want the Fair Use clause stripped out of US law.

Why? Because it's redundant and it has led to widespread missunderstanding of fair use. You could strike that clause from the law and fair use would not change one wit! If you check the cogressional record when it was first passed they stated it was intended to reflect existing fair use, and that it was not intended to expand, restrict, or alter existing fair use in any way whatsoever!

Since Section 107 of the law describes fair use, many people have the mistaken impression that that law somehow grants, defines, and restricts fair use. They have the mistaken impression that fair use can be altered/restricted/eliminated simply by rewriting that law. That is incorrect. Fair use existed before that law existed, therefore it cannot be that law which created fair use.

You you actually read that clause carefully, it does not place any limitations on fair use at all! In fact what it says is that fair use is whatever the courts say it is. It merely lists examples of fair use, and gives a minimum list of factors to consider in determining fair use.

If you read the history of copyright law, fair use was established by the courts on constitutional grounds from the very beginning. It was repeatedly found that copyright law would be unconstitutional if it actually attempted to impose the sweeping restrictions it claims to impose. Rather than striking down copyright law as invalid, the court bent over backwards to assume that copyright law implicitly never even attempts to apply in cases of fair use. That copyright willingly flees in the face of fair use.

It is not copyright law which grants and defines and restricts fair use. It is fair use which rescues copyright law from being struck down as unconstitutional.

Where fair use treads copyright is entirely swept away.

The fact that fair use was written into law in 1976 in section 107 has led many people to false beliefes about fair use. Rather than acknowledging and protecting fair use rights as intended, section 1

Re:well

[RWerp]

My mother (she's a teacher) had a similar situation: a guy entered her class and wanted to promote some English courses, or books. He said he got the permission from the headmaster, but my mother threw him out anyway.

Re:well

[tomhudson]

McDonald's providing arithmetic practice sheets driven by its products and pricing for use as in-class exercises. This would have been fine as a hand-out at its restaurants. The justification was that teachers can always use free teaching materials, whatever the source or motivation.

Since this is about "evening out the playing field", maybe you can offer a screening of "SuperSize Me"

The only role that these sorts of things have in the classroom is in a high school level civics style class that discusses why they should not be used in the classroom.

Interesting. I had a history teacher who would have us play "Propaganda". We'd look at adverts and have to figure out how many lies they were telling, how they slanted the truth, etc.

Re:well

[Idarubicin]

Why? Because it's redundant and it has led to widespread missunderstanding of fair use. You could strike that clause from the law and fair use would not change one wit! If you check the cogressional record when it was first passed they stated it was intended to reflect existing fair use, and that it was not intended to expand, restrict, or alter existing fair use in any way whatsoever!

Since Section 107 of the law describes fair use, many people have the mistaken impression that that law somehow grants, defines, and restricts fair use. They have the mistaken impression that fair use can be altered/restricted/eliminated simply by rewriting that law. That is incorrect. Fair use existed before that law existed, therefore it cannot be that law which created fair use.

Actually, the impression that fair use can be restricted, expanded, or altered by changing Section 107 is entirely correct.

Despite some recent bad law (*cough* DMCA *cough*), it is generally taken to be true that the concept of 'fair use' is a necessary and constitutionally implicit part of copyright. However, until the provisions of the 1976 Copyright Act were passed, the notion of what constituted 'fair use' was left entirely up to the courts. Beyond established case law, there were no hard and fast guidelines to aid an individual or corporation in determining what constituted acceptable and fair 'fair use'.

Through Section 107, Congress created a legal framework in which fair use was defined. Its aim was to describe fair use in a way that was acceptable both to Congress and to the courts, and provide a more formal structure to what has previously been a patchwork of rulings and debates. Until 1976 there was a legislative vacuum in that area, and the courts were left to make it up as they went along. Section 107 allowed Congress to at least shape that doctrine while still working within the bounds of the Constitution. (Incidentally, in some cases it may have expanded fair use, as well.)

Re:well

[Alsee]

If you really look at what 107 says, boil down the clauses and examples, it really only says one thing: the fair use of a copyrighted work [] is not an infringement of copyright. PERIOD. Everything else is examples and non-binding tips to consider.

Actually, the impression that fair use can be restricted, expanded, or altered by changing Section 107 is entirely correct.

As I said: If you check the cogressional record when it was first passed they stated it was intended to reflect existing fair use, and that it was not intended to expand, restrict, or alter existing fair use in any way whatsoever!

Congresssional testimony is on record that 107 is not intended to in any way expand, diminish, or alter existing fair use rights. Would you like me to dig up a link to the congressional record and the exact quote?

Any interpretation otherwise is in direct conflict with the experessed intent of the law.

However, until the provisions of the 1976 Copyright Act were passed, the notion of what constituted 'fair use' was left entirely up to the courts.

Read the text of 107. It still is left entirely up to the courts. 107 merely cites some already established examples of fair use and cites a few already established things to consider when determining fair use. Those examples and those factors to consider were copied directly from court rulings. There is absolutely nothing constraining or restrictive in the text of 107. Everything is positive and expansive. About the only effect of 107 is that it prevents the courts from going back and reversing their determination that those items are fair use, and going back an eliminating those four factors from the list of factors they consider to determine fair use. Though courts are still perfectly free to say specific cases of those examples are not fair use, and perfectly free to give those four factors zero weight in their consideration. So no, 107 doesn't even restrict the court in that direction either.

Beyond established case law, there were no hard and fast guidelines

Everything in 107 was copied directly from established case law.

Through Section 107, Congress created a legal framework in which fair use was defined.

Nope. They just refelcted the existing framework which had already defined fair use. It sasy so in the congressional record. They added nothing but an intentionally redundant and non-functional restatement of it. They added absolutely no restrictings because they couldn't without running into constitutional invalidation issues again. They "turned over" total control and freedome to the courts, which the courts already possesed. Without fair use copyright law is in fact unconstitutional and null and void. Copyright law only survives though the forbearance and good graces of the courts, and through the courts sweeping it away at will through fair use.

Its aim was to describe fair use in a way that was acceptable both to Congress and to the courts

It did so by merely writing down that fact that the courts always had, and continue to have, the unrestricted ablity to determine fair use.

Until 1976 there was a legislative vacuum in that area

Yes. The actual text of copyright law is prima facie unconstitutional. According the the Supreme court it is literally impossible to write a law defining and constraining fair use because fair use includes uses that haven't been dreamt of yet. Any attempt to explicitly define and restrict fair use risks violating the implicit assumption that copyright law never actually attempts to apply to fair use in the first place. Violating that implicit assumption risks having copyright law itself thrown out.

All 107 did was explicitly acknowledge that they courts could continue doing exactly what they were already doing.

and the courts were left to make it up as they went along.

Yep, and 107 didn't change that.

in some

Re:well

[ghostlibrary]

>I had a history teacher who would have us play "Propaganda". We'd look at adverts and have to figure out how many lies they were telling, how they slanted the truth, etc.

Nowerdays, they call that 'hobby teaching' and you get reprimanded for doing it. You have to teach to the test, using approved materials only.

*sigh*

language?

[Anonymous Coward]

In September, the ALA will hold focus groups with teenagers to better understand...what language they use.

OMGLOLWTFBBQ?

Re:language?

[Roofus]

Can somebody please explain to me what the hell BBQ means? All I can think of is Barbeque, which doesn't really make any sense.

Of course, people who talk/write like that rarely make sense anyway....

Re:language?

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought it was the dewey decimal system.

Re:language?

[The_Unforgiven]

It's a parody sort of thing, making fun of the excessive acronyms.

I'll demonstrate:

OMG U DIDN'T NO WOT IT MEANS! OMG LOL LMAO BBQ

See? Funny! ...Well, it amuses me anyway.

Re:language?

[MachDelta]

BBQ sometimes stands for "be back quick" in games.
But in instances like this where the BBQ is included in a string of words, its purpose is purely satirical. Its kind of like the "kitchen sink" of online acronyms.


I IS LIEK SO SMERT!! LOLOLOLOLOL!!!1`1oneoneleventyone

Re:language?

[John Courtland]

Conan the Librarian : "Don't you know the Dewey Decimal System?!?"

Re:language?

[rokzy]

Dewey Decimal System is a piece of shit. you have to fucking pay to use it.

Re:language?

[Alsee]

BBQ sometimes stands for "be back quick" in games.

Akkkk, really? Blech.
I play online a lot and I've never seen anyone use it. I always see AFK or BRB. Actually BRB is pretty cool because you can overload it as Bath_Room_Break (the fundamental meaning is Be_Right_Back).

-

Re:language?

[lachlan76]

Never seen anyone use that before, mostly we use BRB (Be Right Back) or BBS (Be Back Soon) for that purpose.

Re:language?

[JET 666]

BBL GTG GGs

Re:language?

[Anonymous Coward]

What part of "SHALL NOT" is so hard to understand?

Re:language?

[monkeyfamily]

Hear, hear! The Library of Congress Classification System beats the pants off Dewey Decimal any day. And it's even got a sense of humor - under LoC, the bible's classified under BS!

The BSA?

[civman2]

"Citing concerns over materials being distributed to American students by the BSA" The Boyscouts of America?! What's wrong with the Boy Scouts?

Re:The BSA?

[Anonymous Coward]

First off, the way you've written it out they don't abbreviate to BSA.

Secondly, they're for fedral money on their terms. Which come on, it's Caeser's coin, he gets a say.

And lastly, there motto is always be prepared to exclude people who might be different than you in ways you'll likely find never affect you.

Yay! Values!

Re:The BSA?

[jc42]

... the BSA" The Boyscouts of America?! What's wrong with the Boy Scouts?

Probably the same thing that was wrong a few years ago with the GSA (Girl Scouts of America) - They sit around campfires singing copyrighted songs without first getting written permission from the copyright owners and paying the license fees.

Bunch of anarchic, socialistic copyright-violating pirates with no respect for the law, all of them!

Re:The BSA?

[rpj1288]

The business Software Association. If they're gonna go by an acronym, they need a different one. BSA ment the Boy Scouts since the early 1900s. They were there first!

Re:The BSA?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's amazing how a voluntary organization can't even set minimum rules for membership anymore if it happens to offend someone.

If I wanted to create an organization where people who have lip rings were excluded, I should be able to. Who cares if it's exclusive. That;s the whole point of a private organization. Selectivity.

Has everyone become so thin-skinned? Screw anyone who advocates political correctness.

Re:The BSA?

[The_Unforgiven]

Funny thing is, I've met gay scouts when I was one (a scout, not a gay scout :P). It's like any other place: Some groups are accepting of it, and just say "eh, he's a decent guy, who cares", and other people are bothered by it.

I suspect the religious connections in scouts are why there's that offical anti-gay thing, but offical and practice are two differant things.

Re:The BSA?

[Narchie Troll]

Oh, they can. Legally, they can.

And everyone else is legally entitled to not give them support or to even call them a homophobic, chauvinistic organization whose primary purpose is to feed fresh meat into the grinder called the US military.

Re:The BSA?

[harkabeeparolyn]

??? I thought BSA was Bovine Spongiform Angioplasty.

Re:The BSA?

[RadioTV]

That's BSE. Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy or Mad Cow

Re:The BSA?

[Geoffreyerffoeg]

It's now the BSAA, the Boy Scouts' Association of America, with "leadership skills" apparently "inspired" by the MPAA and RIAA.

Re:The BSA?

[Anonymous Coward]

You're thinking of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy, you fucking idiot.

Re:The BSA?

[Helios1182]

Its definately about religion. The scouts are based on Christian values, and those values say that homosexuality is bad. In order to be a scout you have to be accepting of god and be morally (and in turn sexually) straight. They have certain values that they obide by and they should be able to protect those values. They are a private group. I figure that if you don't agree with the values of the organization, too bad -- don't join or be involved in any way. I was a scout, and I have gay friends. I can see both sides, but I think both sides should be entitled to their own points of view.

Re:The BSA?

[harkabeeparolyn]

*crickets chirping*

Obviously my sense of humor is waaaaaay off today. :-P

Re:The BSA?

[DAldredge]

How does the BSA take tax dollars?

Re:The BSA?

[Anonymous Coward]

Bitter?

Re:The BSA?

[Anonymous Coward]

My high school did not allow people wearing hats in. Isn't that a bit hypocritical, not allowing hat wearers in when they take in tax dollars, some of which are contributed by people wearing hats?

It's a fricken behaviour people! Stop pretending it's something greater. This is a social issue to be worked out by society, not imposed by the government.

Re:The BSA?

[paganizer]

Who frikking cares? no reason to regulate it, it's once again parents responsibility; If there is a gay scoutmaster and you don't like it, put your kid in a different pack or none at all, your choice.

Re:The BSA?

[nuklearfusion]

The Boy Scouts may be based on chrisrion values, but, much like the grandparent said, there is some selectivity in this issue. I have a couple of atheist friends that are members of the boy scouts - one even made eagle.

Re:The BSA?

[pgnas]

You know, that is very interesting, arent' they encroaching on a registered name?

Re:The BSA?

[einhverfr]

What defines Christian Values anyway? Some random defference to the writings of St. Augustine and others (not just the Bible, of course). Shouldn't we be looking at the structure of society rather than a Sh'ria-like Divine Law?

Of course, there is not a statue of a Greek goddess on the top of the Capitol building because we are a nation of Christian Values....

Re:The BSA?

[Alsee]

Well, almost the same thing as before. However this time with the BSA (Boy Scouts of America) - They sit around campfires singing copyrighted software without first getting written permission from the copyright owners and paying the license fees.

-

Re:The BSA?

[Anonymous Coward]

The scouts are based on Christian values, and those values say that homosexuality is bad

No, the view of some Christians is that it is bad.

[The Boy Scouts] are a private group. I figure that if you don't agree with the values of the organization, too bad -- don't join or be involved in any way.

That's cool. So long as they don't make use of my taxes in any way. Or, at least, any way that the local coven of witches, skinheads, and Communist Party can't also benefit from.

Re:The BSA?

[Anonymous Coward]

And lastly, there motto is always be prepared to exclude people who might be different than you in ways you'll likely find never affect you.

You are a person spreading hate. It should be noted that the Boy Scouts of America teach values that contradict "people who might be different than you." One should not be foreced to abandon his or her principles or values, neither should the Boy Scouts of America. By forcing them to contradict the very values they try to uphold, you automatically discredit anything about yourself that is good.

Of course, you liberals have never EVER look at the other side things, unless to prank call Rush Limbaugh.
Of course, you liberals don't have a spine in which to stand for something, unless it gives you political gain.
Of course, with you liberals, it's always about the money.
Of course, you liberals haven't done anything good to improve the society in recent years.
Of course, you liberals are only for the selective free speech that you give Viacom, but not ClearChannel.
Of course, how could anyone think of liberal actions as moral?

Sir, go to hell. Nothing but the innards of hell benefit from you. If you dislike scouts so much, go to hell, you'll only find a few there.

Re:The BSA?

[mtrisk]

The Business Software Alliance, as discussed in /. several days ago.

Re:The BSA?

[TheAntiCrust]

That may as be, but my Synagog had a Boy Scout group of which i was a part of. So its not a totally christian thing ;)

Re:The BSA?

[FearUncertaintyDoubt]

For reference, see John Jacob Jingle Heimer Schmidt Jr. vs. Wichita Falls Troop 147, 1981. Mr. Schmidt testified that, "Troop 147 blatantly and egregiously harmed the value of my father's name with an off-key rendition of his self-titled song. And his name is my name too."

Re:The BSA?

[dgatwood]

The question becomes whether they refuse to allow burkas or yarmulkes. If they do, then it's an issue to be imposed by the government, as it violates a constitutionally-protected right.

As with everything, there are fine lines to be walked....

Re:The BSA?

[ceejayoz]

I have this funny image of a bunch of 10 year olds singing 0s and 1s gustily around a campfire.

Re:Hooray!

[Anonymous Coward]

well, y'know...librarians like to do it with books...and some with videos and music too... ;-)

More Lawsuits!

[Anonymous Coward]

The MPAA announced today that they will begin filing lawsuits against two current fifth-grade students who were former winners of the MPAA's own student essay contest. Winners were provided with MPAA T-shirts as well as copys of last year's Best Picture winner "Return of the King". According to the MPAA, one of the winners showed the video to her entire class during a "pirate pizza party" while the other student allowed his cousin to borrow his winning t-shirt w/ out paying the proper licensing fees.

Not suprising.

[c0dedude]

Librarians and free media have always been the standard-bearer for issues of personal liberty. A while back, a group of publishers sued libraries for distributing books. Libraries have carried books, even when they've been shunned by society. They were the first ones to rail against the PATRIOT Act. They are one of the most significant forces against promoters ignorance, misinformation, disinformation, and junk science in existance right now. Remeber who had the fewest misconceptions about the Iraq war?

Re:Not suprising.

[dj245]

They are one of the most significant forces against promoters ignorance, misinformation, disinformation, and junk science in existance right now. Help me get a TV! [freeflatscreens.com]

I find it extremely amusing that you talk of ignorance, misinformation, disinformation, and junk, and then include a link to a scam for a free LCD TV in your sig. Should have been modded funny.

Re:Not suprising.

[zoloto]

rock on.
my library gets free linux/windoze support from myself when their staff can't handle it. they have no formal IT department. it's pretty cool since i have it in with the head librarian. i tell them how it is, and as long as it doesn't break anything, it's all good.

bwahaha

Re:Not suprising.

[Anonymous Coward]

Haha, true. But, dammit, I want one of those free TV's. And it's not a LCD, it's a flat panel CRT. And it's not a scam, really, it's marketing. If you accept that, then it's an offer. Your evaluation of the offer determines whether it's a scam. I think it's a fair deal.

Re:Not suprising.

[Anonymous Coward]

Remeber who had the fewest misconceptions about the Iraq war?

Me.

- typical /.er know-it-all

Re:Not suprising.

[Anonymous Coward]

I support privacy, so long as a free TV isn't involved.

Re:Not suprising.

[Boiling_point_]

Remeber who had the fewest misconceptions about the Iraq war?

You mean, apart from all the rest of us people outside the USA?

Re:Not suprising.

[Anonymous Coward]

not to mention every female librarian I know (under the age of 35, gotta add that caveat) is just plain awesome (in every way you can imagine).

Re:Not suprising.

[c0dedude]

No, twit, it's NPR listeners.

Typical AC know-nothing.

Re:Not suprising.

[Anonymous Coward]

There are "people" outside the USA!?

Re:Not suprising.

[Anonymous Coward]

"Remeber who had the fewest misconceptions about the Iraq war?"

I think that would be the Iraqis, yes? Well, the survivors anyway.

Re:Not suprising.

[Anonymous Coward]

There is an "outside" of the USA?

Re:Not suprising.

[Anonymous Coward]

What is USA?

Re:Not suprising.

[Anonymous Coward]

That weird country that's sending a tank to your house.

Re:Not suprising.

[Anonymous Coward]

How many do you know? 0.03?

Re:Not suprising.

[tunabomber]

Heh, whatever. Laura Bush is a librarian. Although I guess its possible she has completely different political beliefs than her husband, but keeps her mouth shut about them in public like a good Christian housewife.

Re:Not suprising.

[Alsee]

What is USA?

It's a city in China.

I'm serious. They do a lot of manufacturing there. They can convienently stamp their products "Made in USA" and ship it to the U.S.A..

Aw crap. When you end a sentence with a dotted initialism are you supposed to put a double period at the end? Or just leave it dangling with no period? Yucky yucky either way. Of course as a programmer obviously the correct anwser is the double period, but it sure looks odd.

-

Re:Not suprising.

[Dever]

bra-fucking-o. i was just noticing the idiotic sig line.

hey, get a FREE IPOD here while you're at it.

Re:Not suprising.

[Analogy Man]

Making statements like this

We want to teach children to be thinking human beings

You can well imagine what conservatives think of them!

Thinking human beings? Unacceptable! People will question authority and form their own opinions. Imagine the chaos. I'll have my information spoon fed to me thank you very much.

I am Analogy Man and I approve this message.

Re:Not suprising.

[Anonymous Coward]

Just leave the "dangling" period, double periods are completely out. Of course, most people trying to write properly would have spelled out the country's name in full to avoid that situation (especially if using a question or exclamation marks).

Re:Not suprising.

[Anonymous Coward]

As a recent Library Science graduate, I can honestly say that the people in my program had a broad range of views. From actual Marxists to people that would make Bush, Cheney, et. al., look like they were left wing peaceniks. We had one woman posting on our listserv who was a heritage foundation supporting, self-professed conservative. One of our students actually felt that this woman was liberal!

Bah, parents aren't doing their jobs!

[Anonymous Coward]

BSA, MPAA, RIAA, ALA, US government, et al... When will people learn? If parents don't teach it to their kids, then someone else will. Since this is undesirable, action should be taken.

Attention all parents and those considering parenthood! Repeat after me: INDOCTRINATION BEGINS AT HOME.

Re:Bah, parents aren't doing their jobs!

[aelbric]

Actually, education begins at home, indoctrination begins at school.

Re:Bah, parents aren't doing their jobs!

[jc42]

It's even worse than you think. Most parents repeatedly attempt to instill in their impressionable childrens' minds the idea that nice people share their toys with their friends. This is a clear enticement to copyright violation.

And it's even worse than that. Many of those parents knowingly hand over their children to "schools", which are institutions that also attempt to teach the children that they should share.

After years of this sort of indoctrination, it's not surprising that the result should be teenagers (and even adults) who think that it's ok to violate copyright by sharing ideas, documents and music with each other.

These organizations are merely trying to interrupt this process and teach the children that ideas and songs are like toys and other kinds of property: Every child should have his or her own, every one should be paid for, and they should never be shared. Sharing is an economic perversion that undermines the private property that is at the heart of our corporate economic system.

(Lessee; will I get a "Troll" or "Funny" rating here? Maybe I need a ;-)

Re:Bah, parents aren't doing their jobs!

[vericgar]

I disagree.

Indoctrination does begin at home, at least in most cases. It's called Religion.

Not that Religion is bad, it serves the purpose of keeping those that can't seem to think for themselves from killing all of us just because it would be fun. But for many people, it is just a death grip keeping them from learning everything they can because it closes their minds.

Re:Bah, parents aren't doing their jobs!

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, it depends on the home and the school. My upbringing at home (which was largely not religious) allowed me to give myself a wealth of knowledge whereas my "education" at school forced me onto a path I didn't want to take with an education that didn't give me what I wanted to have.

Re:Bah, parents aren't doing their jobs!

[manitoulinnerd]

I totally agree (unless this person was being serious). It seems like many polititons have either forgotten or decided to ignore the "sharing and caring" aspects of their childhood. I havn't done too much research but it seems that the people running the country are of a different mindset then the general population. The setting that it seems many of the leaders of the counrty were raised in does not seem to be one where property is shared. This brings me to the academic portion of my post. Take a look at the academic world. Resources are shared. Ideas are shared. Knowledge is shared. Most of this is done with as few boarders as possible. It makes things more efficient, faster, safer, and more productive for all. It seems that these arn't priorities for the current government. Welcome to 2004, where property is no longer strictly tangable!

Re:Bah, parents aren't doing their jobs!

[Anonymous Coward]

this is a terrific insight. are you sure we can't mod this person to +6?

Re:Bah, parents aren't doing their jobs!

[jc42]

Now, now; don't be greedy with your karma. There's plenty for everyone.

Re:Bah, parents aren't doing their jobs!

[Fancia]

Religion doesn't *have* to be that, you know. There are religions which suggest critical thinking. Go back to St. Augustine in Christianity, and you'll find his *recommendation* to read non-Christian works. He was absolutely against a proclamation that banned the reading of non-Christian books by Christians.

Re:Bah, parents aren't doing their jobs!

[mrchaotica]

It's too bad St. Augustine is in the vast minority -- he's drowned out by all the missionaries and fundamentalists.

Re:Bah, parents aren't doing their jobs!

[mrchaotica]

By that argument, capitalism (or at least corporatism) is un-American, since people like Thomas Jefferson considered copyright (as well as all other "IP") a necessary evil at best.

Re:Bah, parents aren't doing their jobs!

[Beryllium Sphere(tm)]

Wasn't there a Simpsons episode featuring the Ayn Rand Nursery School ("remember, children, sharing is bad")?

Re:Bah, parents aren't doing their jobs!

[Anonymous Coward]

"It's even worse than you think. Most parents repeatedly attempt to instill in their impressionable childrens' minds the idea that nice people share their toys with their friends. This is a clear enticement to copyright violation.

And it's even worse than that. Many of those parents knowingly hand over their children to "schools", which are institutions that also attempt to teach the children that they should share.

After years of this sort of indoctrination, it's not surprising that the result should be teenagers (and even adults) who think that it's ok to violate copyright by sharing ideas, documents and music with each other.

These organizations are merely trying to interrupt this process and teach the children that ideas and songs are like toys and other kinds of property: Every child should have his or her own, every one should be paid for, and they should never be shared. Sharing is an economic perversion that undermines the private property that is at the heart of our corporate economic system.

(Lessee; will I get a "Troll" or "Funny" rating here? Maybe I need a ;-)"

It's worse than you think !!!

Every major religion is for sharing. Our school system itself is free thus socialistic and a form of sharing, democracy and voting is all about SHARING governance !!

It gets worse!!

LIFE itself is a shared condition, which ends in a shared condition called death, in which in the end we are all equalized. Damn those laws of physics which are SHARED and applied EQUALLY to all!!!!

Re:Bah, parents aren't doing their jobs!

[Alsee]

Every major religion is for sharing.

Correction, Scientology is not for sharing. Their sci-fi stories of galactic overlords solving overpopulation problems by stacking people around volcanoes and setting off hydrogen bombs is copyrighted religious text. It is illegal to share that with someone unless they have first paid tens of thousands of dollars to Scientology to be trained up to that level.

-

Another "Yay Go Librarians" Article

[LordStrange]

...by Kurt Vonnegut I Love You, Madame Librarian

Re:Another "Yay Go Librarians" Article

[theCoder]

Thanks for the great link! That was one of the funniest things I've read in a while. Sure the sarcasm was subtle, but it was so over the top, the author couldn't have been serious. I especially liked the part about how it's wrong and dehumanizing to order troops around and "make 'em do anything". And comparing all Christians to Nazis was a nice touch, too. Really put it over the top.

What? The author was serious? Wow... and I thought Bush was an idiot.

Now watch me get modded down as a troll for mocking something posted on the great Michael Moore's website. Actually, the author did make some good points, but so much of it was such an extreme liberal rant with no basis in reality that anything valid was obscured. But I guess even raving lunatics can say something profound every once in a while.

Re:Another "Yay Go Librarians" Article

[Anonymous Coward]

[. . .]the author couldn't have been serious.

Do you even know who Kurt Vonnegut is? Not that this makes his logic any more defensible, but if you know who Vonnegut is you would know his sarcasm is a hallmark of his writing. You think its such a stretch comparing Christians to Nazis? You mean some of the very same Christians (though not all) who believe that Muslims should die?

Stop reading Slashdot for a few seconds and educate yourself at a real library. (I'm not bashing Slashdot, but your post seems undwritten by ignorance. I mean, you don't even recognize Vonnegut.)

Re:Another "Yay Go Librarians" Article

[jburroug]

You're not familar with Vonnegut are you? He was, in his own imcomparable way, being sarcastic and satirical in that essay. He didn't compare all christians to Nazis either, he did point out that Bush calls himself a christian just as Hitler did, with the implication that just because one calls himself a good christian person doesn't make it so. Nor did he compare the actions of the US Army to those of the Wehrmacht or the SS, he's comparing the way people in the world today feel about American forces to how people felt about the Nazi's during/before WWII.

And Vonnegut knows a thing or two about Nazis and of war. He's a WWII veteran and was a POW in Dresden during the firebombing raids. His novel, Slaughter House Five is an account of that experience.

Vonnegut's style is to use extreme, often absurd and bizarre examples, as well as satire, to present his theme. Granted it's more effective in novel form than in essay form, unless you're already familar with his work and know what to expect. To the uninitiated this essay, if not read carefully, could come across as the liberal equivilant of an Ann Coulture essay, but trust me there's far more substance there. I would personally suggest picking up a copy of Mother Night or The Sirens of Titan (his first book) as good starting points if you want to read any of his books. Slaughter House Five is very personal and quite painful at times, so I woudln't recomend reading that until you've tackeled a couple of his other novels.

Micheal Moore is a chump compared to Vonnegut.

Re:Another "Yay Go Librarians" Article

[theCoder]

You're not familar with Vonnegut are you? He was ... being sarcastic and satirical in that essay.

No, I'm not familiar with the author's work. If that is the case, then I take back what I said in my previous post.

Re:Another "Yay Go Librarians" Article

[jburroug]

His style can take a little getting used to, and on a controversial subject I imagine it could be even harder to understand him. It doesn't help that the OP linked to Micheal Moore's reposting instead of the orignal on In These Times

Anyway I also wanted to let you know that I've 'friended' you because of your reply - reasonable discussions are rare enough these days in any medium that it's worthwhile to befriend anyone that demonstrates they are able to carry one out :)

Old-fashioned librarians are great people

[LibrePensador]

This borders on the obvious but librarians love books, which means that they are often well-informed liberals in the enlightenment sense of that word, i.e., someone who is broad-minded and tolerant of the views of others and expect others to behave in the same manner.

They also understand that our cultural heritage depends on free sharing for its preservation and nurturing -as does innovation. Librarians are therefore quite suspicious of those who try to place limits on the sharing of cultural outputs, particularly when they do so to benefit from the social conjectures and economic dislocations produced by a given technological moment in history.

Re:Old-fashioned librarians are great people

[jyoull]

I wish i had some mod points for that IDEA.Civilization / society owe a lot to librarians for just providing some of the glue that holds it all together (as much as it barely sticks together at all). Also you should work with reference librarians whenever possible, and don't give me that crap (prior post) about "we just use the Internet." A great research talent is an incredible secret weapon.

Re:Old-fashioned librarians are great people

[jc42]

Also you should work with reference librarians whenever possible, and don't give me that crap (prior post) about "we just use the Internet."

Actually, the idea that the Internet competes with libraries, while enticing, turns out to not be true at all. Public libraries all over are getting tied into the Internet, and for the poorer parts of society, this is often the only access to most of the world's information.

Librarians have generally figured out that the Internet doesn't replace hard-copy books; they complement each other in useful ways. Having Internet access in the library gives the librarians the freedom to be a lot more selective about what books they have on their shelves. They are starting to figure out what sorts of things are best presented in book form and which are better online. And libraries are migrating to a system that stocks up on the former while making the latter available via computers.

They just have to figure out how to handle the pr0n and spam problems ...

Re:Old-fashioned librarians are great people

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah and that cute ones can *freak* like nobody's business. I wonder what books they are reading....

Re:Old-fashioned librarians are great people

[shigelojoe]

They just have to figure out how to handle the pr0n and spam problems ...

I agree whole-heartedly. I mean, last week I went to the library, checked out a book about financing a new home and found nothing but ads for Viagra and hookers. ;P

Re:Old-fashioned librarians are great people

[Halfbaked Plan]

Well, some librarians love books. Others want to make sure 'the collection' is kept current and meeting the specific needs of that particular week/month/year. So they actively cull anything offbeat or obscure.

And many librarians have been very active in the destruction of the historical record they are supposed to be preserving, in their active efforts to badly microfilm, then pulp, historical newspaper collections.

Re:Old-fashioned librarians are great people

[Halfbaked Plan]

They are starting to figure out what sorts of things are best presented in book form and which are better online.

Yes. And then they quit buying books so they can make the payments on this years new computers equipped with Gateware. Also to make sure they keep the collection of videotapes and 'talking books' current.

Re:Old-fashioned librarians are great people

[Anonymous Coward]

"which means that they are often well-informed liberals in the enlightenment sense of that word"

isn't that an oxymoron "Enlightened libral"?

I think the term you are looking for is libertarian.

stendec@gmail.com

Re:Old-fashioned librarians are great people

[Anonymous Coward]

And many librarians have been very active in the destruction of the historical record they are supposed to be preserving, in their active efforts to badly microfilm, then pulp, historical newspaper collections.

Cites?

Didn't think so.

Re:Old-fashioned librarians are great people

[JamesKPolk]

"Liberal" used to mean What we call libertarian in the US. "Liberal" just got hijacked to mean socialism, so the American classical liberals needed a new term.

Re:Old-fashioned librarians are great people

[Fancia]

I don't have the article I've read it in with me to cite, but that is actually true. Libraries have even been throwing out the lovely clothprinted books newspapers printed specifically for libraries because badly-done microfilm is supposedly good enough. In some cases, the pictures are simply unviewable.

Re:Old-fashioned librarians are great people

[Anonymous Coward]

Read a little history.

The Enlightenment is a specific period of history and that is what the poster was talking about.

The Enlightenment emphasized reason, tolerance and learning.

Re:Old-fashioned librarians are great people

[Alsee]

They just have to figure out how to handle the pr0n and spam problems

While spam is certainly a problem, I think the "pr0n problem" is that people are considering it a problem. Hell, the Library Of Congress carries Playboy. I remember looking up and posting the library code for it once, chuckle.

-

Re:Old-fashioned librarians are great people

[Alsee]

The Enlightenment is a specific period of history and that is what the poster was talking about.
The Enlightenment emphasized reason, tolerance and learning.

It's sad that emphasizing reason, tolerance and learning is considered a period of history. We could do with a revival.

-

Re:Old-fashioned librarians are great people

[number11]

many librarians have been very active in the destruction of the historical record they are supposed to be preserving, in their active efforts to badly microfilm, then pulp, historical newspaper collections.

Cites?

Didn't think so.

Well, it's probably more library administrators (some of who are librarians) fighting to deal with inadequate budgets and space, and the demand for (and sexiness of) newer technologies (Internet access, CDs, etc.) that enroach on existing physical space. You want cites?

Do we want to keep our newspapers?
Novelist buys and saves old papers to avert their destruction

Re:Old-fashioned librarians are great people

[barks]

Yes they're grand.

I feel sorta bad how we use to treat the librarians back in high school...seting off the theft alarms with magnets and them metal strips, and giving them fake names when they questioned who we were.....

Gosh, and we thought they were soooo conversative.

Re:Old-fashioned librarians are great people

[16K Ram Pack]

Ultimately, it's all just information.

Sadly, my local library is pretty rubbish (through no fault of their own - old buildings, lack of budget). The internet gave me a ton more research material.

Books cost a lot of money, even out of print stuff, because of the physical production costs. How much would it cost to print the collection from project gutenberg?

Re:Old-fashioned librarians are great people

[jyoull]

Ultimately, it's all just information.

Sadly, my local library is pretty rubbish (through no fault of their own - old buildings, lack of budget). The internet gave me a ton more research material.

Here I must disagree and I think you're missing something good. It's not all just information. There's information, and there's knowledge. They don't map 1:1. A good librarian helps navigate through the information so that you get to knowledge. That's what ya want unless you're a database. I'm not a database. I need knowledge and there is way way way too much "information" flapping around out there for me to possibly survey on my own so someone's got to make that first cut, organize i, make it possible for me to find what i need rather than swimming around in a sea of random information.

There is also much more "information" in the world than what you can find on the Internet. In finishing my thesis I made extensive use of off-Internet databases of both specialized and general journals/magazines, that were provided by MY library.

I'm sorry your library is crap. Why don't you spend some time figuring out if there's a way to fix it and then helping to make that happen? Good libraries make other good things happen around them.

Re:Old-fashioned librarians are great people

[jyoull]

Actually one of the main jobs of an archivist is to decide what to throw away, and ultimately, almost everything gets thrown away... where would they store it?

If there is a problem with the microfilm, then rather than bitching here, talk to the person responsible for that and figure out why they're putting up with a poor job from the external vendor who's probably making the films. And if they won't listen, go to the library's board of directors and talk to them. These are real people at a local level who can usually be approached and talked to reasonably, and i'm surprised when more peeps don't do that.

Re:Old-fashioned librarians are great people

[Halfbaked Plan]

One of the jobs of an archivist is to provide deep archives of relevant information.

There have been substancial books written on this topic. You won't find the book I had in mind on the 'banned book list' put out by librarians, however.

Here's info about the book. Don't bother looking for it at some libraries. It pisses off the librarian.

Re:Old-fashioned librarians are great people

[Halfbaked Plan]

Here's your cite, bubba.

Double Fold- Libraries and the Assault on Paper.

You didn't think. So?

Re:Old-fashioned librarians are great people

[Anonymous Coward]

Yep 1837 libraries (or library co-ops) have that book. Massive censorship going on there. For comparision approx. 850 libraries have copies (of various editions) of "The Coming of the Book" one of the best regarded works on the subject of book, printing, and publishing.

Re:Old-fashioned librarians are great people

[Halfbaked Plan]

Wow. I didn't know there were American Librarian Association fact-checkers anonymously trolling Slashdot.

Re:Old-fashioned librarians are great people

[Anonymous Coward]

Someone corrects you because you are full of shit and they are an ALA troll?

Finally, some good news.

[sexybomber]

What a refreshing break from "Your rights are being diminished." "Bush is on the warpath." "SCO is being generally evil."

Re:Finally, some good news.

[orthogonal]

What a refreshing break from "Your rights are being diminished." "Bush is on the warpath." "SCO is being generally evil." M

Yes, it is!

But before we start sing "Hosanna!", let's keep in mind:

• Our rights are still being diminished, both by Ashcrofts & Blunketts and by corporate lackeys in the state and national legislatures.
• Bush is still on the warpath and in fact he's moving up to 100,000 U.S. soldiers out of Europe and Asia, possibly for more "adventures" in the Middle East
• SCO is still being generally evil, and no doubt is thinking up more desperate, frivolous lawsuits

Why am I being such a buzz-kill? Because we can't just sit back and let the librarians fight all out battles for us, can we?

You can ignore politics (for a while), but it won't ignore you -- and one day you'll wake up and find the new regime expects you to out on nice shiny fetters and crawl like a slave.

Re:Finally, some good news.

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, your rights are being dimished, Bush is an idiot and an embarassment, and SCO is run by Asshats.

Hope that helps.

Re:Finally, some good news.

[Txiasaeia]

I'm so confused. Do I mod this as funny, flamebait or informative? *twitcH*

Re:Finally, some good news.

[JaxWeb]

Why would you sing "Hosanna!"? Wouldn't you sing a hosanna?

Am I confused?

The librarians have enlisted Legolas

[Dave21212]

The librarians have enlisted the help of Legolas Greenleaf of Mirkwood, Sindarin decendent of the Teleri...

I think the chance of being victorious over the BSA, MPAA, and RIAA's evil minions is good !

The BSA, Microsoft and the definition of Extortion

[NZheretic]

The BSA, Microsoft and the definition of Extortion.

No! Unfair! Confusing!

[MBCook]

No! Unfair! Confusing! I hate the ALA. They're evil! They support porn access for kids and have a serious liberal slant and there are so many reasons I don't like them.

But their doing something... good! This is confusing. I'm not supposed to like them but they are doing something good! This is like MS suddenly putting everything up to 2k under the GPL.

My brain hurts! It's confusing. Why can't anyone just be EVIL. Why do they have to do something good once and a while to make you question them?

Well, as much as I don't like them, in this case the enemy of my enemy is my friend, I suppose. The MPAA/RIAA/etc are the greater evil in this battle (IMHO). The ALA is trying to push a specific world view and ideological slant and co-opt parrents (again, my opinion). The RIAA/MPAA is trying to take away my RIGHTS. One is definatly worse than the other.

Re:No! Unfair! Confusing!

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, how can this issue become any more slanted and far from the truth?

The ALA only supports the concept of a free flow of information. They do not believe in filters becuase they do more harm than good and that the government should not be practicing censorship in the first place.

The Dr. Lauras and Rush Limbaughs would have you think through their constant barrage of right-wing groupthink propaganda that the ALA wants to put porno in your kids lap or on their computer screen when that is far from the truth. The ALA only wants to leave such decisions up to parents and adults, not the government, and quite frankly, I agree.

If you don't want your kids looking at pornography, then you need to explain to them why it is somehow "evil" and tell them to avoid it. Just becuase you have a religious zealotry doesn't mean that entire populations should have to be subjected to your religious views.

If supporting free speech is liberal, then count me in!

Re:No! Unfair! Confusing!

[Tar-Palantir]

They support porn access for kids...

There is a major difference between "supporting porn access for kids" and "opposing arbitrary, corporation-influenced censorship for all patrons".

I'm not sure how seriously you meant the quoted passage in your post, but it's wrong and I wanted to point that out.

Re:No! Unfair! Confusing!

[Halfbaked Plan]

If you don't want your kids looking at pornography, then you need to explain to them why it is somehow "evil" and tell them to avoid it. Just becuase you have a religious zealotry doesn't mean that entire populations should have to be subjected to your religious views.

Wow. You're implying that the only people who don't want their kids to hang out in bondage chat rooms are religious zealots.

Let me guess. You're probably not a parent, eh?

Re:No! Unfair! Confusing!

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow. You're implying the only people who are against censorship are not parents.

Let me guess. You probably don't care about things like freedom, eh?

Re:No! Unfair! Confusing!

[Anonymous Coward]

If you don't want your kids hanging out in bondage chat rooms, then you as a parent are the one who needs to tell your kids to stay away from that and give them good reason. If you can't do that, curiosity is going to get to them, censorship at libraries or no. Its simple psychology.

I discussed these issues with my kids and told them why I believe certian things are right and wrong as well as doing my best at keeping them away from things that they are not old enough to handle until a few years later (as in, long before they are 18 but not until they are 10 or 11).

Just as there are plenty of "bad" things on the internet, there are just as many equally "bad" things on the self of the library. If you don't trust your kids on the library computer terminals, then I certianly would not trust them perursing the shelves!

I don't care how you raise your child, but this quote applies very well here: "Censorship, like charity should begin at home; but unlike charity, it should end there."

Re:No! Unfair! Confusing!

[Anonymous Coward]

You are either being facetious or you are an idiot... I am not sure which.

Re:No! Unfair! Confusing!

[Anonymous Coward]

No! Unfair! Confusing! I hate the ALA. They're evil! They support porn access for kids and have a serious liberal slant and there are so many reasons I don't like them.

Okay where is the option to moderate someone down, -1 IDIOT?

Re:No! Unfair! Confusing!

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd go with idiot. The grandparent seems to have no idea what he is talking about. I wish I could live in "make up whatever I want" land.

Re:No! Unfair! Confusing!

[anthro398]

You, MBCook, are a damned fool. The ALA supports a few things you might not have heard of on Fox News. We like to call them democracy, freedom, and liberty. You see, we, and I really mean me and the other library students with whom I am friends, believe that each American has the right to information and that access to information is the cornerstone of democracy.

Public librarians, of which my wife is one, do not want children to look at pornography. They also don't want children to wonder why they can't research papers on gay rights or learn about breast cancer. Filters do not work. They let some bad things through and they block some good things. Every day we see children unattended in the library. Their parents and apparently you would like to impose upon us the responsibility of parenting these children.

So, I find it lamentable that you hate the ALA who fights to protect your right to read without intervention by the Department of Homeland Security and defends Mark Twain from book burning "concerned parents". I am more disturbed, however, that you feel the ALA ideological slant (again, freedom;liberty;democracy) is evil.

Re:No! Unfair! Confusing!

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's face it, MBCook is a disturbed person who most likely thinks that if the "terrorist" John Kerry is elected women will be forced to line up to have mandatory abortions and the phrases "Allahu Akbar" and "bismillah ar-rahman ar-raheem" will replace "In God We Trust."

Re:No! Unfair! Confusing!

[Anonymous Coward]

porn is bad, because it involves sex

violence is good, because we use it to kill bad guys

I don't know why people in the "outside US" (if that really exists) can't understand this

sex=bad, killing=good

basic American English lesson 101

Re:No! Unfair! Confusing!

[0x0d0a]

My brain hurts! It's confusing. Why can't anyone just be EVIL. Why do they have to do something good once and a while to make you question them?

I suspect that the ALA would like to see more people thinking thoughts along these lines in general, where "they" doesn't necessarily have to represent the ALA.

Re:No! Unfair! Confusing!

[Qwaniton]

Don't blame him. He's blindly spouting rhetoric. The reason he's a neocon is because neoconservatism strongly appeals to insecure people...i.e., nerds. Neoconservatism is a "manly man" political philosophy. (I'm trying to remain as neutral as possible.) Neoconservative rhetoric appeals to the insecure because it makes people feel dominant, in control, alpha-male, and morally superior.

As far as I'm concerned, as a recovered ex-neoconservative, this rhetoric does not correlate with reality. However, I can't blame him. It's taken him over like a virus, just like it had done to me. Even the most logically rigorous are prone to this powerful fallacy.

Re:No! Unfair! Confusing!

[Anonymous Coward]

You, MBCook, are a damned fool. The ALA supports a few things you might not have heard of on Fox News. We like to call them democracy, freedom, and liberty. You see, we, and I really mean me and the other library students with whom I am friends, believe that each American has the right to information and that access to information is the cornerstone of democracy.

You're either humor impaired or a moron.. hopefully not both.

Anyway, most of the librarians I've known are good eggs, but there are a few that need to be culled. In addition, they would have you believe that you need a graduate degree to do their job. This is absolute horseshit. Many resourceful library technicians are the equal of a so-called librarian. We have a few techs (I work at a major library) with undergrads in history and philosphy, and their research skills, cataloging skills, reference skills, etc. are just fine.

And yes, OJT is just fine for librarians.. it's the small, influential ALA who wants to keep the priesthood intact.

Re:No! Unfair! Confusing!

[Anonymous Coward]

Let me guess. You're probably not a parent, eh?

And neither are you.. whether or not you have kids. Can't be troubled to keep an eye on your own little brats? Tough shit.

Re:No! Unfair! Confusing!

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't quite see what this has to do with the topic at hand. I guess some of us have our own axe to grind.

Re:No! Unfair! Confusing!

[Fancia]

Libraries tend to have other things that are often considered to be not appropriate for children. It's not the job of the library to censor what's available.

Re:No! Unfair! Confusing!

[JimRay]

They support porn access for kids and have a serious liberal slant and there are so many reasons I don't like them.

Um, what? Porn access for kids? Can you point me to a link where the ALA advocates giving out porn to the kids that walk in their libraries? Google seems to be letting me down here.

And the liberal bias thing - I just don't get it. Most librarians I know support smaller, less intrusive government, which seems pretty conservative to me.

The occasional forays into politics that librarians have made in the past few years seem to be the moderating voices of reason, like questioning the value of having a government mandated censor at the firewall or letting the FBI see what books you check out without so much as warrant. These seem like valid questions to be raised, and if the government were suddenly making your job more difficult, while cutting your funding, I'd expect you to be raising similar questions, as a matter of patriotism.

Or were you just being disengenuous?

Re:No! Unfair! Confusing!

[endofoctober]

No, I think what the AC is implying is that the only people who don't want their kids hanging out in bondage chat rooms and expect other people (like the government) to keep them out of said chatrooms are religious zealots. Or at least that's what it seems to imply. I'd go farther and say that these dolts are either zealots or are horribly misguided about parenting and responsibility.

You don't have to have children to understand the most critical part of raising a child :: if you had 'em, you raise 'em.

Re:No! Unfair! Confusing!

[Anonymous Coward]

wow,I`m surprised someone would think the book written by Hitler is innapropriate. I think its amazing they put these things up because Hitler is one of the most important figures of 20th century history(being a bad person doesn:t change that fact).

The teacher I admired most in high school used to carry the book around studying it, probably becuase he loved history so much(small town, older teachers actually taught him). I doubt 25 years ago if he could find that book anywhere but in our library. Congrats to libraries that are willing to put the challenging books on their shelves so people have access to everything.

Anyways, I commend libraries that fight the damned fools of conservatives that find books like The Catcher in the Rye, Hamlet, Macbeth, King Lear, Harry Potter(yes, it`s demonical and must be stopped by banning it, of course, actual parenting if you feel this way is much too difficult for these conservatives), and many more.

My high school librarian posted the list she was given as to books she shouldn`t have and went out of her way to make sure they were on the shelves. If people saw the pressure put on librarians by so many groups to do such idiotic things as hiding Harry Potter, I think a lot more people would have respsect for what libraries do.

Note, to anyone who finds Harry Potter offensive and improper, well, tough. I call you morons who can`t handle something called imagination and it`s really unfortunate we have people like that in power from time to time.
I don`t feel like logging in:Gordo3000

Re:No! Unfair! Confusing!

[Tarwn]

While I agree with the general thrust of your commentary, I feel I have to point out the major fallacy in your supporting points:
"They also don't want children to wonder why they can't research papers on gay rights or learn about breast cancer"

The purpose of fighting against the proposed filtering programs twofold. One, because the ALA believes people have a right to access constitutionally protected material in a public institution, and Two, because even with a definition of obscenity/et al, the tests of filtering software show that there are many cases whee the software will let through "obscene" items while also suppressing non-"obscene", First Amendment protected items.

The reason I pointed out the particular phrase above is because it gives rhe wrong impression. The ALA does not want to support children's questioning of why materials are blocked because the basis of that statement is that materials are blocked.

I too believe in parents having to take responsibility for parenting their children, unfortunatly I am a conservative, which in these environs generally means everything I say, regardless of content or logic, is either incorrect or gross inflation of some party line.

Re:No! Unfair! Confusing!

[Anonymous Coward]

How did you escape? How can I help others with that horrible disease?

Re:No! Unfair! Confusing!

[Anonymous Coward]

What is the matter? Were you too stupid to get accepted into a Library Science Master's program?

Re:No! Unfair! Confusing!

[Fred_A]

AAahhhh now it all makes sense.

Thank you for finally making it all clear !

(still a bit bother at the possibility that I may not exist though, although nowadays, can any one really claim to be outside of the Empire?)

Re:No! Unfair! Confusing!

[BalorTFL]

And the liberal bias thing - I just don't get it. Most librarians I know support smaller, less intrusive government, which seems pretty conservative to me.

Yeah, I used to think that too... until the Patriot Act (and the proposed Patriot Act II) made me change my mind. The latest batch of conservatives seem to be very much in favor of big, intrusive government.

Re:No! Unfair! Confusing!

[abb3w]

Porn access for kids? ? Can you point me to a link where the ALA advocates giving out porn to the kids that walk in their libraries?

Well, lets take a look at the ALA Library Bill of Rights. Trimming only the most construable pieces:

I. Library resources should be provided for the interest[...] of all people of the community the library serves.
II. Materials should not be proscribed or removed because of partisan[...] disapproval.
III. Libraries should challenge censorship[...]
V. A person's right to use a library should not be denied or abridged because of [...] age [...].

So: If the library has a public internet terminal in its resources, and some kids are interested in porn, the librarians should not only let them have access to the terminal to find what's out there, but also resist any attempts by social conservatives to require filters to prevent this, as a matter of basic library principles. This sends FoxNews conservatives orbital. QED.

I've discussed with one of my freinds who is a reference librarian how she deals with this sort of thing. (Of course, she wasn't always a librarian. In college, she was an oversexed party girl, despite a mousy appearance to the first glance. She has publicly stated that she married her husband because "he's frigging huge and screws like a bunny". She still drinks like a fish most weekends. Librarians are oft loundly debauched party animals once you get outside of the "Quiet Please" library itself.)

She occasionally sees a decidedly under-age patron using one of the public terminals to surf for porn. Her solution is to go up to the kid and say (in a helpful librarian tone at normal librarian volume) "Oh, it looks like you're searching for porn. Is there anything in particular I can help you find?" About one time in ten, the parents haven't abandoned the little weasel to their own devices, perk up their ears, and come running to chew junior out. (If they don't keep an eye on their kids, they must live with the consequences-- see patron management.) Eight of the other ten times the kid goes "no, no, I was just finished"... and leaves. No courage of their convictions, the lot of em.

Once in a while, however, the kid will actually say what he (or rarely she) is looking for. And she helps them find what they're looking for-- that's her job. Of course, she doesn't direct them to goatse.cx or stileproject.com right off; she's familiar with a variety of more tasteful sites, from browsing with her husband. (Under what conditions, I do not inquire, but can easily guess.)

Even those brave ones don't usually let the "how to search for quality pr0n" lessons last long (being freaked out by the association of sex and librarians), and usually are relieved to be referred to a dead-tree book on sex education fairly soon. Not always, though--she mentioned once having an extended conversation with an unhappy girl who was uncertain of her sexual orientation. She helped the girl find some quality material (both factual and fantasy) on the web. She also recommended the girl have a discrete talk with either her parents or the high school's sex ed teacher. And of course, there was the teenage boy who assumed that her being helpful with his finding porn meant she was loose, and tried a pickup line; she provided him with an icy (quiet) earful on the cultural significance of two rings worn on the finger next to the pinky on the left hand, on the mutual disadvantages of sex between the underaged and those significantly older, and on incivility's subtantial anaphrodisiac properties and detrimental effect on one's liason prospects. He left with a copy of "Miss Manner's Guide to Excruciatingly Correct Behavior", with the suggestion that studying it might help his prospects among the opposite sex nearer his age group. =)

If the kid is at the library looking f

I'm not enlisting in this "war"

[orthogonal]

"We're trying to educate children at a very young age about the importance of protecting copyrighted works," said Diane Smiroldo, vice president of public affairs for the BSA. "It's important to start talking to them at a very young age about creative works online and what you can and can't share with your friends."

Smiroldo compared the BSA's program to an antismoking or antilittering campaign. The curriculum doesn't talk about fair use but focuses on what are "right and wrong" behaviors online.

Hmm, lemme see, smoking harms the kid himself, littering defaces the entire community, and "pirating" copyrighted works hurts -- oh right, the Business Software Alliance.

And lemme see, these kids, having mastered all that readin', writin', and 'rithmeticin' -- ain't no child left behind no any more --, they've got plenty of time to spend learning a corporate lobbying group's version of "right and wrong".

I've never pirated music or software, and I do believe that the MPAA and the BSA should have the protection of copyright -- including the right to bring civil suit.

But when they try to co-opt the education of children and get the Department of Justice to bring their civil suits for them, and to pile criminal charges on top, well, it seems to me the corporations are getting much more than a fair shake.

Begins to remind me of the "War on Drugs" -- a "War" we'll never win but which benefits corporations building and running prisons (and the drug mafias and the prison guards' union) at the expense of cops and taxpayers and citizens.

It even makes me wonder if the "content providers" have gone so far as to forfeit their moral rights to copyright protection. There comes a time when you just have to say that the "cure" is worse than the "disease" (as for instance, the "War on Drugs") and tell those grabbing more than their fair share of money and legal power, "this far and no farther".

Re:I'm not enlisting in this "war"

[Beryllium Sphere(tm)]

>I've never pirated music or software

Have you ever sung "Happy Birthday" in a restaurant?

It's still under copyright, by Summy-Birchard.

If you've performed it in a public place without paying ASCAP, you are a pirate in the eyes of the RIAA.

>it seems to me the corporations are getting much more than a fair shake.

I agree with the folks who modded your post insightful.

Re:I'm not enlisting in this "war"

[drinkypoo]

Have you ever sung "Happy Birthday" in a restaurant? It's still under copyright, by Summy-Birchard. If you've performed it in a public place without paying ASCAP, you are a pirate in the eyes of the RIAA.

I don't believe it works that way. If the restaurant employees perform it, then it's a breach of copyright because it's being used for commercial purposes. If you go to a restaurant and sing it to someone, it's just fine. This was the argument used to take the song away from TGI Friday's and the Boy Scouts.

There's almost no more "fair use" left

[vudufixit]

It's more like, "fuck youse" from the RIAA, et al.

A Canadian Question...

[Anonymous Coward]

Here in Soviet Canuckistan, we have the right to borrow a CD from a friend, make a copy for ourselves, and then return the CD.

Does the same apply with libraries? And what about DVDs? (IE, am I in the clear if I go to my university library, take out a whole slew of Woody Allen movies, and then rip them to my computer before I return them?)

Re:A Canadian Question...

[wrathcretin]

I'm in Quebec, and yes, I've borrowed the film and the book The Apprenticeship of Duddy Kravitz as well as Mondo Bizarro, the Ramones album from my library. It is perfectly legal here, to my knowledge.

Re:A Canadian Question...

[Fancia]

To my knowledge, libraries are fine for music, but DVDs are not covered either way. The tax on blank CDs (which likely doesn't cover blank DVDs yet) goes only to the music industry. Only if a similar levy to go to the movie industry is introduced is it likely that it would be made legal to copy DVDs.

Re:A Canadian Question...

[fabio]

it used to be that way here in denmark, but the lobbyists from RIAA and its eqvivalent here in denmark changed that

and trust me, we have our scandals with our APG(antipirategroup)

Re:A Canadian Question...

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, since the change was due to Denmark implementing the EU copyright directive, most of the lobbying would have been in Brussels and the capitals of the major EU countries. Thankfully, the onerous nature of the directive was recognized by the last Finnish parliament and so we still haven't implemented it around here...

All hail the librarians!!!

[stox]

IMHO, no other group of professionals in our society have done more to protect the American ideal of life. If you don't already, talk to your locla librarian. You will find them to be one of the most remarkable resources in your life.

In other news...

[leonbrooks]

...the MPAA is cross-sued by the owner of the design for the T-shirt itself for trying to make money out of their T-shirt pattern without paying appropriate licence fees.

We need your help

[Anonymous Coward]

Librarians are getting overruled these days, not just by national directives such as the USA PATRIOT Act, but by activist governors.

Last month the South Dakota governor removed a section of the state library Web site because it gave health advice to teens.
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/webguide/internetlife /2004 4-07-13-sd-censor_x.htm

This month the Kansas governor had rap CDs removed from all libraryies.
http://edition.cnn.com/2004/SHOWBIZ/Music/08/06/li brary y.cdsettlement.ap/index.html

A Librarian

Re:We need your help

[Anonymous Coward]

That first link is no good, even though I removed all the spaces...

Re:We need your help

[vettemph]

This month the Kansas governor had rap CDs removed from all libraryies. http://edition.cnn.com/2004/SHOWBIZ/Music/08/06/li brary y.cdsettlement.ap/index.html

This statement is not helping your cause, trust me.

Re:We need your help

[Anonymous Coward]

The Kansas issue was that the government did not want to be the ones distributing those CDs. There was no ban on the libraries themselves getting whatever materials they saw fit, through other channels.

Look near the bottom of slashdot's webpage

[mc6809e]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2004 OSTG.

I think it's important to remind everyone that even slashdot seems concerned about protecting it's copyrighted material -- despite the stories selected for posting by people like michael.

Re:Look near the bottom of slashdot's webpage

[One Childish N00b]

I think it's important to remind everyone that even slashdot seems concerned about protecting it's copyrighted material -- despite the stories selected for posting by people like michael.

Fair point, but I don't think OSTG are going to sue a 12-year-old girl for telling a CowboyNeal joke at a slumber party...

Re:Look near the bottom of slashdot's webpage

[ArbiterOne]

Everyone does this. They've done it for years. It's a cover-one's-posterior thing, not a reduce-people's-rights thing.

Re:Look near the bottom of slashdot's webpage

[mc6809e]

Everyone does this. They've done it for years. It's a cover-one's-posterior thing, not a reduce-people's-rights thing.

Cover one's butt from what? What are they trying to protect?

Fact is they are claiming control of the information.

And consider this: what is it that they REALLY provide in terms of content? The stories they mention aren't theirs. The comments aren't theirs. Just what is? Yet they assert their copyright while bashing others that do the same.

Just think about that. They provide almost zero content and all the while make big money off the content of others.

Maybe they consider getting rich off of others work and example of "fair use."

Re:Look near the bottom of slashdot's webpage

[LibrePensador]

Wrong.

Slashdot is like a compilation CD or book. What is copyright is the order of the stories, the timing and the editor's notes on it.

Perfectly legitimate, btw.

And you have every fair-use right to link to them in your own blog or to quote them.

Re:Look near the bottom of slashdot's webpage

[chary]

"I think it's important to remind everyone that even slashdot seems concerned about protecting it's copyrighted material"

So does the FSF. What's your point? When Slashdot starts sending out COD letters to people because they've copy and pasted a goatse link, it's time to start shouting and screaming...

Re:Look near the bottom of slashdot's webpage

[Anonymous Coward]

question: Doesn`t slashdot, or whoever did the programming, own all the code that runs this site? wouldn`t the HTML and all that fine stuff I can take from this website if I wanted to be covered under the copyright?

this is not to ask a bunch of open ended questions, but I`m really wondering if that might be what they are talking about??

Not even needed at most schools

[ShatteredDream]

At many schools the attitude is already decidedly against those groups. At my university, James Madison University in Virginia, AudioGalaxy usage was so high that we almost had our own self-contained AG system because that's how many local users had that many mp3s to share. The university only eventually busted users for bandwidth abuse when it got to the point that people in certain dorms couldn't even really use basic online university services like webmail.

Our CS program is also basically MS free and we're starting to get some real recognition by the NSA and DoHS for our information security work. Most of the CS and many of the other classes I've seen outside the department also are pretty hostile toward the views of these groups.

Good work, thanks libraries. However, the situation is much better on most campuses than many would believe.

Re:Not even needed at most schools

[Alsee]

At many schools the attitude is already decidedly against those groups.

Which is why that are targeting fourth graders who haven't been exposed to outside information on the topic before and who have not yet developed any critical thinking skills. Though to be fair most college graduates haven't developed critical thinking skills yet either.

-

evil?

[minus_273]

I'm sorry, you can disagree but not label the other party evil. It sounds really childish and dilutes the meaning of a rather harsh term. It also distracts people from the message you are trying to get across.

Re:evil?

[chary]

"It also distracts people from the message you are trying to get across."

Good point, even if that message does largely boil down to 'Copyright's a tool; The Industry's just tools.'

Re:evil?

[JaxWeb]

Offtopic: What is your sig about?

Quote: "Current death toll from Amnesty International's actions in Nepal: 9000"

Go ALA

[wrathcretin]

Not quite familiar with the ALA, but up here in Canada, my library rents out books. It has a couple of small shelves of hardcover new stuff that you'd get for roughly 2-3$ a week. Pretty fair. I'm sure they're paying whatever legal duties or price for those books to rent them out and you can legally read the new Steve King book without shelling out an arm and a leg. That said, I happen to find it bloody interesting that the ALA is getting involved in the whole online/copyrighted scheme of things. This is a public organization, supported by public money (ie your tax dollars) that acquires a broad amount of copyrighted material (and at my local library it extends to music cd's, film, magazines etc) intended for free public consumption. I'm liking the idea of a public library using public money to now make that content available over the internet. The ends will justify the means. Imagine how culturally enriched we could be as a society if every young person (or at least those online - which in 15 years will be all of them) who would never set foot into a library, (come on, the place is flat out boring) could actually access the entire catalogue of available material from their computer when they got bored of ebaum's world. The business world, MPAA, RIAA, BSA etc can rape us of fair use and any use of our purchased items, but I love the idea of the ALA getting involved in this, because the more the average Joe can equate the concepts of copyright with that place where you can pay 3$ for a membership and take out whatever the hell you want and pay $0.05 a day late fees, the more the general public concensus will sway towards maintaining fair use and maintaining copyright for its originally intended purposes.

Re:Go ALA

[JimMcCusker]

In the States, public libraries lend books for free. You go to your town's library, give them some proof of residency (another resident's word is often enough) and they give you a card. You can then take out as many books as you want, usually for about 3 weeks, no charge. If you want to keep them longer, you bring them back and have the loans renewed. If you forget, they charge you a nominal 10 cents per day per book. In most states, that card is good at any other public library in the state. So I can go to the state capitol library instead of my small local library, and have a huge collection at my disposal. No membership, no nothing. These libraries are usually funded partially by the towns or counties as well as by a "friends of the library" organization that conducts fundraisers. Larger libraries also have endowments, but all of them provide the service to the public at no charge.

The public library system in the US is amazing. I honestly think that it is one reason that the US has had so much of an advantage in the last century: everyone has free access to large book collections, meaning that anyone who has the inclination and interest can learn whatever they want.

Re:Go ALA

[red floyd]

Actually, the Los Angeles Public Library has something called "Project Bestseller", where you can check out newer books (NYT list, I guess) for $0.15 per day. It's restricted to a few hot new titles, the rest of the collection is free to borrow.

Re:Go ALA

[Coke in a Can]

The public library here in Kingston, ON (Canada) is the same - free memberships for residents of Kingston, funded part by taxes and part by the Friends of the Library. The only fees are late fees, and since you can renew over the internet and most likely the phone, they aren't a big deal.

I was quite surprised to hear that the library where wrathcretin lives charges for "rentals".

Re:Go ALA

[Anonymous Coward]

Hold on, what the hell? A library that charges money to 'rent' a book? Surely you don't mean late fees.

I have NEVER heard of a library charging you to borrow books - none of the libraries in the entire Vancouver area of British Columbia do so, in any case.

Re:Go ALA

[Alsee]

I'm sure they're paying whatever legal duties or price for those books to rent them out

Well down here in the US we have a really subversive library system. Once they buy a book they own it and they can lend it to anyone they like. There are no "legal duties or price" for lending out your own property.

-

Re:Go ALA

[devnullify]

There do exist some publically funded and run libraries around here. I saw one on one of the Saltspring Islands this summer. They probably don't get any tax dollars and are funded by nominal membership fees directly from the users.

Seems fairly reasonable to me. It's better than the alternative: no library. And you don't have to pay if you don't want to use it.

Re:Go ALA

[Idarubicin]

Not quite familiar with the ALA, but up here in Canada, my library rents out books. It has a couple of small shelves of hardcover new stuff that you'd get for roughly 2-3$ a week. Pretty fair. I'm sure they're paying whatever legal duties or price for those books to rent them out and you can legally read the new Steve King book without shelling out an arm and a leg.

This sounds unusual, and I should correct what are likely misconceptions.

First of all, public libraries in Canada are generally free to use, as they are in other civilized nations. In a few areas, I wouldn't be surprised if there's a creeping trend towards annual user fees and whatnot, but I'm hoping that gets stomped on.

Public libraries in Canada are underfunded, however--again, as they are in most other 'civilized' nations. Libraries look for alternate revenue streams. What the parent describes is an opportunity to check out that new bestseller now, rather than waiting for several months for interest to die down. In exchange for that privilege, you pay a small premium. For a lot of people, paying $2 for a week's loan is a much better deal than buying the hardcover for $30.

That extra revenue in part will go to ensuring that the library does have a stock of the current bestsellers, but part of it I'm sure also gets diverted to other library programs. Note that the vast majority of the circulating collection is still available without charge.

In my experience, the only people that are charged for using the regular collections of a public library are individuals visiting from out of town--there's usually a nominal fee, because they haven't already contributed through their local taxes.

That said, I happen to find it bloody interesting that the ALA is getting involved in the whole online/copyrighted scheme of things. This is a public organization, supported by public money (ie your tax dollars) that acquires a broad amount of copyrighted material (and at my local library it extends to music cd's, film, magazines etc) intended for free public consumption.

Actually, this shouldn't be surprising at all. In working with (acquiring, storing, distributing, reading) copyrighted works day in and day out, members of the ALA are subject matter experts on the effects of copyright law. The ALA regularly has to squarely face questions of both copyright law and the First Amendment. Medical associations regularly make statements to the public on issues of health, even in countries (like Canada) where health care is largely publicly funded--and they do it partly for similar reasons. Your doctor doesn't want you to hear about medicine only from a drug company.

How much copyrighted material do most of us deal with in any given day...or lifetime? The ALA includes public libraries, university libraries, various technical groups, and more. A large university collection can exceed ten million items, and include books; maps; newspapers; magazines; recordings of music and the spoken word on CD, audio tape, and LP; moving pictures on 8 mm tape, VHS and Beta cassettes, Laserdisc and DVD; journals in paper and electronic format...plus university librarians also have to deal with professors who want to use copyrighted material in their courses.

Librarians would have to be a lot dimmer than we give them credit for if the ALA were not to take an active interest in the impact of copyright law.

cookies...

[osho_gg]

So where do I buy American Libraries Association's cookies???

Libraries

[Anonymous Coward]

Wonder how many hypocrite copyright holders have ever borrowed a book from a library (and thus ripped off a poor publishing house).

Same with musicians. How many have benefitted from fair use and now vehemently oppose anyone "stealing" their work most of which is a derivation of fair use.

ban porn -- burn bibles

[Anonymous Coward]

Oppose porn in the library -- ban bibles!

forced rape of young girls is one of the nastiest types of porn, and for that reason, all those disgusting bibles need to be burned!

Re:Hooray!

[rock_climbing_guy]

CONAN, the LIBRARIAN!!!!

terry pratchett's default answer:

[ignatus]

ook?

So Where Can We Get It?

[SEWilco]

So where can we see the information?

Yup, the article mentions high school librarians will get copies. I'm sure high schools will be thrilled to have more visitors to their libraries. We need a date posted, so we can /. libraries.

The ALA's aims

[0x0d0a]

Hmm, lemme see, smoking harms the kid himself, littering defaces the entire community, and "pirating" copyrighted works hurts -- oh right, the Business Software Alliance.

To be fair, copyright is a mechanism with a purpose other than just enriching the BSA. It's part of a system designed to allow content funding to be produced.

The ALA is just interested in people not having something presented as "right" and something else presented as "wrong" -- they'd rather have people consider the benefits themselves.

I have no problem with copyright per se -- the question is whether it is still practical and useful in its current from in present day, where it is nearly impossible to enforce, and where it has been extended far, far beyond the intent of its creators.

Many Slashdotters may not like Britney Spears. However, she clearly entertains many people, and I don't have a problem with publishers making money off her if they are entertaining people -- if that's what people want, let them have her.

On the other hand, I'm not convinced that they should have her for her lifetime and well beyond, nor am I convinced that copyright can be enforced any more, nor am I comfortable with DMCA-based end runs around fair use. That doesn't mean that we should "drop copyright" -- we have a number of content-producing mechanisms that are based around it, and no good systems that will necessarily replace them. It does mean that copyright reform may be necessary, and given that I feel that the ALA is a group of people with a good deal of insight into copyright-related issues, I'm more inclined to listen to what they have to say than a number of the other players in the copyright game.

Burn, baby burn...

[HermanAB]

I think it is time that Americans come to their senses and burn all the evil libraries down.

Repent! Repent! and Read no More!

Come to think of it, the American school system is actually doing a marvelous job with creating illiterate young adults, so the **AAs have nothing to fear. Eventually, everybody will have to pay someone (in another country) to read for them and all reading will be outsourced to India.

The reason why they do not include homosexuals

[Anonymous Coward]

The Scout Oath

On my honor,
I will do my best
to do my duty
to God and my Country
and to obey the Scout Law,
to help other people at all times,
to keep myself physically strong,
mentally awake, and MORALLY straight.

Schools and indoctrination

[0x0d0a]

And it's even worse than that. Many of those parents knowingly hand over their children to "schools", which are institutions that also attempt to teach the children that they should share.

Schools are an interesting system -- they both indoctrinate and inform. Control of the schools is one of the most powerful long-term institutions to control.

It's not even that I dislike the BSA/RIAA/MPAA that much -- I just don't want *any* corporate marketing taking place in schools. If the BSA/RIAA/MPAA wants to fund a marketing campaign, they can certainly do so, and there are many channels that will let them target children -- but not in the schools, dammit. If schools are filled with marketing drivel, how can children trust anyone? It's not that I'm saying that people shouldn't question what they're taught in schools, but some things have to be at least accepted in the short term in order to operate, while we learn enough to find inconsistencies in arguments -- the stuff in schools is normally less trusted than than in 30 second spots between advertisements.

If the Weekly Reader wants to sell a section of their space to the BSA, I'd at least like to see them have to donate equal space to groups like the ALA and the EFF, to present kids with both sides of an issue and let them think their own way through the issues involved.

Re:Schools and indoctrination

[0x0d0a]

the stuff in schools is normally less trusted than than in 30 second spots between advertisements.

Uh, that should really be "more trusted". :-)

Ford and Carpools

[einhverfr]

These organizations are merely trying to interrupt this process and teach the children that ideas and songs are like toys and other kinds of property: Every child should have his or her own, every one should be paid for, and they should never be shared. Sharing is an economic perversion that undermines the private property that is at the heart of our corporate economic system.

In other news, Ford announces it will initiate thousands of lawsuits agains those who illegally share rides known in a process known as "carpooling."

Re:Ford and Carpools

[Anonymous Coward]

" In other news, Ford announces it will initiate thousands of lawsuits agains those who illegally share rides known in a process known as "carpooling." "

The auto industry has spent HUGE sums to decrease mass transit : buying up and destroying rail lines, lobbying against busses and for free roads, tearing up streetcar infrastructure, etc.

Business Reply Mail

[Anonymous Coward]

After a quick look at the Propaganda on their website, I noticed a "Survey" form that includes a "Business Reply Mail" envelope template.

You know, the kind that the person recieving the survey must pay the postage for.

Wouldn't it be great if all of the slashdotters would send in their comments? (2+ Million). At 37c a piece, that would total a little over $740,000.

I personally may send in a few, just so my voice may be heard.

The survey can be found at http://www.playitcybersafe.com/pdfs/BSAsurvey.pdf

It's targeted for teachers, so I guess we all will need to roleplay for this one.

Re:Business Reply Mail

[Tesral]

Why? Just mail it blank. Print a hundred and mail them blank.

Oh, and just so it is known they are NOT paying 37c a piece. They have a business reply bulk rate, you can bet on it.

That said, money is money, and money spent to get blank survays back would be a bear. I wouldn't even print the survey side. Just the reply side.

translate the secret message :D

[TRIEventHorizon]

**AA ppl, decrypt this code and find out the secrets to all patents and copyrights!

-----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----
Version: PGP 8.1

qANQR1DBw04DcHuijMDn4gYQD/0Q4Z/ZrjsEgXZS67/JxItXi1 bXG9NaY3HMtLd1
HM5ZrYTZlACCarcIxtSWIcuaPQjuSJeLVqzo/9oRRdPzq/Kt1H 0ueqvLt81ghCyE
KW+p/DnD1tbvqsbkYLx345mczPFPl7/a6wYGdD17RKc2X352ey GDAPBNLinE0xJ2
pUMGag8cYF1TWwLVxIz19dxIrWCslaVT3wnJJmIzykeZtQckpu fyP+LXW8214ObD
GlcI1oXe4rrd0am3gxOQOF0Dy30V0pSwhmDROjXcfGk8q7vkIv qOfERhwnMVcDO5
YGFDoaJyRT0w01Zr9Fz6A6+qMF+EYyf9tjEXyNjB7rFLktxLC8 TLbD9b8nDdFQ6D
xhImYtmcAbHKc0/YfeLM8aGmRDFsNLBPJHk9TI6NGULqW1LuJ7 9feoLqTZNj1ZOe
zjgcabJataVafqLDpee/8wiw5Z+eG11XjhUqr9oKeB+l4UNgQr eOcbL1QN824VOH
X3/d8wCwXwUXwDncB401vSGi1mhjmD2i3iJetdTYZJWTFOm5JZ VfLKCq30qWXls9
OJeRBaoyXppx54qvopi3rdFhv7uTYezd4OV8ucDbGUSInbB3ag p+Nm5WZZKq0ZU6
9C+Rv/2lxYgbXmYMcKwLan9GKW+xs/f9iC1saXjaLQYJKD6v/7 10lqzAyNJeWuw3
1jc7MhAAvCYI9bbM2AarHwy8zhXZLhIYELM1NNjQm5XEbgtjoE Yj13pYGjnQjRFQ
CB+6hjUzaui8Bugz370kPE9SF4BUnW4/B20cf7mK13X2Sixgly N4kmu8z6pyi5iy
fkRUtRMPdrugjdVVW7sHP8UB/V1Z9XriojOAX3pXZR4WLqlZQq 9bPBd1+52mYe+L
8AU2KqDMBfDyo4DGbkqEd2q/dO2dwgR979+nrR2HgORRC/t3/N iM4DNI16+SGsZ/
ioK4n3Qe0xYz/cv4463rQc60sZ3gZXGC85iK6vGDmZk6JV6oMK mrOM45TbsesJ6c
7Pn1ght9wvOlQUEtNXCXChHN1H+od7kBvZ8KanbWGPeKKhNP3j juxnpCHAQRE/sy
JEk39yG89ALhSwZ8kPfD2AaEXB16QufKm0TR7Awq2eH8oC19ox O5Ij34NPs9/t3p
wgLmNDiTBBNnYCzKoVkr353udQPLRq1pmQ+5Ot96prm2e5BRWt nYPwjBqpOA3KqI
EUgFVKwVBWhoFgZ4bBevw2xIwUQDZYJAIvdUL8YNJQhcrZGkDs e5r1pdhcXJH3Ha
CvCCuR6NShjOvAF7quu+hPgb0vuFVfvTks5U7CGlqatoM8dAh5 6IBUmx45/7hQGt
k6CfqriONdLStjXu3QgqXJ+Pgecp7RWYRci8DsoYyxK+FbTvgU 3SwGIBTD816eIG
5NbQyoD0pdKJmzJ/0wTV8nTQX6hzdGg9qolgMkH6Sf11GECyHF R7V+bNhY97Ccxe
iZfKVJNxVMMN5uOu2pkftSMmTJbJipAxAhxPW2lzYvGBmWszX+ H40KrkbOOewdpi
jeIzMrXNsiNLEhMbrWX2M5M5ogeAb8Fq5yIw6zDkpIgy0HnOsq Jr7Cm1ult3scfh
h28ejJenikOtWH9spqsPvC8oowzzDweGfuB0hDYUrUIiImtkkt fwnJsahyYzt9v0
+a/ejdtLS+qJ0mKz3VJPFQDAQ/Ohusg+brgDk/7qTw64AZVqS9 ndSmKJkK/nf0eW
MUBGl8bnnYsjlf8rsaNfsiMk+IO+whB82qO4LlGzUmPc/+YgO/ pLevmpZQ==
=dpIX
-----END PGP MESSAGE-----

+1 to off-topic

Re:translate the secret message :D

[TRIEventHorizon]

Slashdot screwup: On each line of encrypted code, the 51st character appears to be a space, remove the space between characters 50-52 plz :D

Re:translate the secret message :D

[Cyberop5]

!! forgot http://slashdot.org/~TRIEventHorizon/pubkey

That's the biggest downside with public key encryption.

Here's the corrected link (Sorry)

[Anonymous Coward]

Try this one:

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/webguide/internetli fe /2004-07-13-sd-censor_x.htm

Re:Here's the corrected link (Sorry)

[Anonymous Coward]

Or better yet this one.

Am I missing something?

[MunchMunch]

" All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2004 OSTG."

"Fact is they are claiming control of the information."

So, why exactly is a statement which affirms that each poster 'owns' the comments they make controversial? It sounds like you just don't understand what this is saying.

Nothing that that disclaimer says isn't already true by nearly every instance of international/Berne-convention-automatic copyright law in the first place. Slashdot has copyright protection on content that originates from them and they (Slashdot's operators) put on their pages. The notice at the bottom simply reiterates and affirms that posters forfeit no automatic-copyright rights when they post to Slashdot--just in case it wasn't clear. So basically, everything is as it would be if people were communicating via any other spoken or written medium. Slashdot is not claiming anything other than what is written in copyright law, and in fact is going out of its way to point out that copyright law applies in favor of individual posters and won't be used to try to assert control over posters' comments, in case that wasn't clear.

What's your problem with this again?

A Canadian Answer

[Anonymous Coward]

<disclaimer class='usual'> IANAL. This is not legal advice. </disclaimer>

Here in Soviet Canuckistan, we have the right to borrow a CD from a friend, make a copy for ourselves, and then return the CD.

Nearly; our Copyright Act, s.80, provides that copying music "for the private use of the person who makes the copy" is not infringement of copyright. It doesn't matter whether it's a CD; what matters is whether it's music and whether your copying is for your personal use.

S.80 is in Part VIII, which also sets up the infamous blank media levy, so it's clear that the policy thinking is "we'll allow this activity, which would normally infringe copyright, and compensate the copyright holders by other means". But s.80 doesn't specify that you may only copy music onto media to which the levy applies; any medium is fine. (Well, I think specific kinds of media could be excluded by regulation, but to my knowledge this hasn't been done.)

Does the same apply with libraries?

Sure. There's no restriction on how you get access to the music you're copying -- from a friend, from a library, from the back of a truck, it's all the same as far as this bit o' law is concerned.

And what about DVDs?

No, but not because they're DVDs instead of CDs; again, the medium doesn't really matter. What matters is the kind of work being copied -- s.80 applies only to sound recordings of musical works, not to films or other classes of copyrightable work that you would usually find on a DVD. Ripping a film from DVD is copyright infringement in Canada, assuming that the film is under copyright in the first place, that the copyright holder hasn't licensed you to do it, and that none of our other copyright exceptions come to your rescue.

If the ripping does infringe copyright, you'd at least be civilly liable, and the act spells out civil remedies for the copyright holder. In some circumstances -- mostly infringement for commercial purposes, but also distribution "to such an extent as to affect prejudicially the owner of the copyright" -- there is criminal liability too.

hey, teacher, leave those kids alone

[Doc Ruby]

How about teaching kids their basic rights, like when they're stopped by police on the street, in their car, or in attempts to search their home? Is copyright more important to inculcate than Miranda rights? Or their rights in a jury to nullify an unjust law used in the trial? Until these priorities are addressed, public education is just another tedious exercise in corporate indoctrination.

Re:hey, teacher, leave those kids alone

[mikelieman]

Uh, public education has ALWAYS been nothing but a tedious exercise in corporate indoctrination.

The Business of Schooling

Since bored people are the best consumers, school had to be a boring place, and since childish people are the easiest customers to convince, the manufacture of childishness, extended into adulthood, had to be the first priority of factory schools. Naturally, teachers and administrators weren't let in on this plan; they didn't need to be. If they didn't conform to instructions passed down from increasingly centralized school offices, they didn't last long.

And this book explains EVERYTHING.
Underground History of American Education

You can read the whole thing online, but I ordered a copy to have on the shelf... Perhaps I'll donate one to the library here in town, if they don't already shelve it.

Re:hey, teacher, leave those kids alone

[dangermouse]

Uh, public education has ALWAYS been nothing but a tedious exercise in corporate indoctrination.

Really? That's funny, I somehow came out of public grade school (in the late 90s) both literate and reasonably well read; with a pretty good background in history; with knowledge of the basics in chemistry, biology, and physics; with mathematics through some elementary calculus; and most importantly, with a desire to learn more and knowledge of how to do so. I was neither "bored" nor "bewildered" (per your buddy Gatto) when I graduated, and somehow I doubt McDonald's gives a shit about any of the things I learned.

There's some bad shit going down in the public school system, but the root cause is not that public schools were built to fulfill some evil corporate agenda-- it's underfunding, plain and simple. People talk a good game about reforming the schools, but always look for solutions that don't involve paying anything, even if they have to solve the wrong problems to do so.

I've just read the site you linked, and sorry pal, but the Gatto's a grade A conspiracy nut.

What better way to habituate kids to abandoning trust in their peers (and themselves) than to create an atmosphere of constant low-level stress and danger, relief from which is only available by appeal to authority? And many times not even then!

I there's some evidence in his book, but I've read my fair share of UFO and conspiracy magazines, so I know this pattern and I have a pretty good idea of the kind of evidence I'm likely to see. This is exactly the same spiel as "the government is keeping us scared so they can impose martial law", or "the UN secretly instigates wars so it can stay in power". It's paranoid bullshit, and it obscures real problems in need of real solutions. I'm sorry if your schooling (public or otherwise) didn't prepare you to discern sensation from insight... mine did.

Re:hey, teacher, leave those kids alone

[Doc Ruby]

I received a full complement of public education, through college, and a year of high-end private highschool, and a summer at one of the top prep schools in the world, as well as frequent attendance at classes at an Ivy League university. Overall, the education was better than adequate to live a life of independent thinking, and respect for knowledge. But the history and "social" studies in particular were very much a whitewash of America's European heritage, its actual roots, and actual costs of progress. Most of my most important education came from a few elementary school teachers, and my own research. But the partnership between my parents, geographically assigned teachers, and myself rates an overall B/B+. I was lucky to have parents who both chose a neighborhood for its schools, and threw in money for experiments with private schools and tutors, neither of which are available to most kids. And they stayed interested throughout my education, which was the most important part of getting me to work with it.

The main crisis in education is the delegation of childraising by parents to schools and TV. The extra money for education, consistently a top 5 priority among voters, would best be spent educating new teachers and devising programs that keep parents involved in the process. That would improve the ratio of adult role models to students, which is the most important factor in teaching kids to think and to know.

Instead, we've got corporate politicians who find a comfortable middle ground between religion and corporations, teaching kids to consume and not to question, or even how. Faith in god, state, and the brand is the source of money and power for politicians, which is an investment by corporations in educating their consumers. Parents would do well to consider the time they need to spend attending school board, PTA and homework sessions when they have kids. Once back in the loop, the corporate faith that is destroying millions of young minds every year won't stand a chance.

Let me explain how libraries work

[Anonymous Coward]

In the US, libraries are free. You can borrow books for periods of weeks.

Its a great tradition, and one that *I'm sure* book publishers hate. But to go against it is to go against one of our founding fathers, Benjamin Franklin, who pushed hard to get the public library system set up to encourage literacy.

At my local library, I can also borrow CD's and a limited supply of DVD's. I can reserve items, and when they come back from loan, I'm sent email so I can go to the library and pick up my book for 3 weeks *free*.

Libraries are cool.

Librarians are tough

[Nice2Cats]

Hey, let's watch the snide subject line, guys, librarians are pretty tough people you really don't want to mess with. Just think Giles aka "The Ripper" from Buffy, or that cute dark-haired woman whose name escapes me but whose image is strangely present from The Mummy. They can seriously kick ass; nine of ten superheroes started out as librarians.

Re:Librarians are tough

[Anonymous Coward]

...and not to forget the toughest of all librarians, the muscular northern hero of all nerdy book readers, Conan the Librarian.

4th graders probably won't even matter

[ShatteredDream]

I remember the "don't copy that floppy" bullshit which was a lot more imaginative than the new campaign they're trying. It didn't work then, it won' work now. The ones they tried to indoctrinate last time became the "file sharing generation" for God's sake.

New legislation can override court precedents

[Anonymous Coward]

Since Section 107 of the law describes fair use, many people have the mistaken impression that that law somehow grants, defines, and restricts fair use. They have the mistaken impression that fair use can be altered/restricted/eliminated simply by rewriting that law. That is incorrect. Fair use existed before that law existed, therefore it cannot be that law which created fair use.

That would only be true if those precedents were constitutional holdings, that is judicial interpretation of the US constitution as opposed to judicial interpretation of federal or state laws. Since those decisions were most likely the latter, a court could rule that some aspect of fair use was based on some aspects of the old law which is changed in the new law.

I am not a lawyer, but I recall hearing a lawyer discuss this very issue with respect to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and the "betamax decision" standard for contributory copyright infringement.

Re:New legislation can override court precedents

[Alsee]

That would only be true if those precedents were constitutional holdings

As I said: If you read the history of copyright law, fair use was established by the courts on constitutional grounds from the very beginning. It was repeatedly found that copyright law would be unconstitutional if it actually attempted to impose the sweeping restrictions it claims to impose.

So yes, fair use was established on constitutional grounds.

When you boil it down, the only thing 107 actually says as law is that fair use is never infringment. It does not in any way attempt to restrict or define fair use.

-

MOD PARENT UP

[SupaMegaBuffalo]

seriously, i've never posted such a reply before but he/she deserves it. i only wish i had mod points left.

MOD PARENT DOWN

[Anonymous Coward]

-1, Retard

Renting Books

[djfiander]

Actually, the libraries do lend books for free (except for a couple of provinces where they're allowed to charge a fee for a library card). You can put yourself on the list for the latest King thriller and wait your turn. You'll be #237 in line.

Some libraries provide this rental option as an "enhanced service". The library leases a couple of hundred extra copies from a service (yes, there are such things), and then leases them out to willing patrons for a few bucks for three or five days (a much shorter lending period than the normal boks). They use the fee to recoup the leasing costs, they're not stuck with two hundred extra copies of the latest flash in the pan, and people that want to read the book quickly, but can't afford $35.00CAD can get it almost as fast as at the book store.

My current library doesn't do this, but my old library did. And fortunately, I was in library school when my old library started doing this, so I had a reason to chat up the staff at the branch about the service. It's mostly a safety valve for the pent-up demand for certain books.

Intellectual freedom

[thrashor]

I was pleased to hear this announcement and am hopeful that other national library organizations will follow suit in their own jurisdictions - students should not be exposed to a single perspective on this or any issue. To quote Tony Samek, of the University of Alberta's School of Library and Information Studies, "The largest current threat to intellectual freedom in Alberta [Canada] is the dwindling numbers of Teacher-Librarians employed in the province." Who else will defend intellectual freedom in the K-12 system?

All I have to say is

[ShadowRage]

yay, go librarians. seriously. this is a good move. last thing I'd want is for my child having to go to school to get brainwashed by some companies to fit their financial interests.

It's much like how the communists infiltrated schools, or the McCarthy era here, where all teachers told their children to report their parents' communist activities to them. etc.

It's very sick that people use children as tools.

One thing people always seem to do is use younge children and the elderly, becauset hey know the two groups arent likely to sock them in the face and tell them to fuck off.

what are they distributing?

[Eudial]

50 bucks on '1984' =P

More cheers for the ALA!

[intnsred]

While the story topic is nice, IMHO, the ALA's work in publicizing Ashcroft's demand that libraries remove information about certain US laws from their libraries is far, far more important of a public service!

Everyone's favorite tyrant AG John Ashcroft wanted ordered the American Library Association to destroy all copies of the federal laws on asset forfeiture and to prevent disclosure of their content. Thanks to quick action and a lot of publicity by the ALA and others, the fascists backed off.

Donate (Zappa did)

[lamona]

You can join the Freedom to Read Foundation, which is a non-profit associated with ALA that takes on issues of censorship (including censorship by copyright). Or you can donate to the Frank Zappa Memorial Fund, which goes to the FTRF, as set up in Zappa's will.

Kill the copyright weasel

[makhnolives]

As an anarchist librarian, it's good to hear that my association is going to launch an aggressive campaign about fair use and the problems with copyrights. I've been advocating against copyrights and intellectual property laws for over ten years, so it's really exciting that more and more people are seeing through the stupidity of IP laws. This swing will continue as the greedy corporations continue to engage in stupid things against the public domain and idea sharing.

Hey Disney, you didn't invent Sleeping Beauty!

World changing?

[IWannaBeAnAC]

You know the world has changed when librarians start getting miltant...

The librarians have enlisted a Pirate

[Xebikr]

The librarians have enlisted the help of Will Turner, a known pirate who is wanted for stealing a ship from Her Majesty's Navy.

Arrrr!!!

Re:The librarians have enlisted a Pirate

[Anonymous Coward]

Silence FOOL!!! Legolas kicks so much orc ass it isn't even funny!

CopyWrong

[hadaso]

> It is not copyright law which grants and
> defines and restricts fair use. It is
> fair use which rescues copyright law from
> being struck down as unconstitutional

More than being constitutional, copyright law is not natural. The way things has been during the past few millenia of human civilizations is that ideas were freely spreading. That's the natural way for our species to do things. Copyright and other "Intelectual property" laws were introduced very recently in human history and their purpose is not to grant rights to owners of "property", but rather to restrict rights. Their ONLY purpose was to allow the use some relatively expensive new technologies to be used profitably. Now that there are alternative ways to to do the same, does the public need the same kind of restrictions?

The first thing to do when teaching young people about "Intelectual Property" is to show how the terminology is misleading: "Intelectual Property" is not property. In the natural way ideas are free. Public interest leads to defining some restrictions, and these restrictions should be minimal and should be periodically revised to fit the times. There is a natural way to keep an idea from being copied: keep it secret. The ONLY good reason to restrict the public from freely distributing ideas is to discourage the keeping of secrets. I don't think that the RIAA or the MPAA or the BSA members would keep their stuff secret if copyright and other IP laws were to disappear. They would just find the right tools to ensure they make some profit from what they distribute. Keeping it secret won't make them any profits.

There is no such thing as being granted the right to copy. This right exists naturally. The law only restricts it to benefit some people, and if the technology or the way things are done changes, the public should reassess things and change the laws accordingly.

Do we really need the law to protect mediocre creations sold to the millions through aggressive marketing when we have technology that can be used to create and distribute content almost freely?

One case for IP laws is that it is designed to protect the ability of creators to benefit from the effort put into creation. At least in the case of the RIAA and the MPAA it seems that the protection is more to the multimillions they pour into marketing, and not into creation. Does the public really have an interest in protecting their investment in marketing? A similar argument applies to patent protection that is more and more applied to protect companies' investment in IP lawyers searching for existing technology that can be registered with the patent office, rather than in creating new technology.