University Tests Legal File Downloading System
philospher writes "Dorm students at Northern Illinois University are testing a legal file downloading service. It is made by Ruckus Network, and was developed by a group of MIT students. NIU pays 5$ a month per student, and the students can get music, movies, TV shows, local content and community features. Sounds a lot better than having the RIAA sending you a court summons."
I'd pay for a service like this. Not too expensive, and keeping me safe from RIAA/MPAA attacks.
I read the article... what makes this legal? not much in the way of details...
It was me, I did it, I moved your cheese
Cornell is giving away music downloads this year.
How is this not illegal? If students are still downloading copyrighted content from each other... *scratches head*.... I don't get it.
And yes, I did RTFA, and the company website.
Posting the following:
"Bryan Ajuluchukwu, a freshman economics major, is one of more than 170 students living on the third floor of Grant Towers who is testing a new downloading service. The service, called Ruckus Network, allows for those students to download music and movies."
is the equiv of posting a target on your forehead for the MPAA and the RIAA to make an "example" out of you, especially for the elusive college market (which is the one they are always, always, always after..)
anime+manga together at last.. in real time.
Let's think this over a bit.....The downloads are "tethered", as TFA states...
But let's consider something different.....
Can't find the population of NIU...But we'll use my school's numbers....Assuming a yearlong (12-month) contract....
$5 * ~40,000 students * 12 mos. = $2.4 million
Why would I want my tuition money (which, at this campus, only pays for more construction, adminstrative wages, yet can't cover enough for class TAs) to be wasted on RIAA/MPAA/AAA-approved media? The schools are always bitching about lack of funds, yet they can somehow afford this? Bullshit...If they (students), would like to pay out of pocket, be my guest. But don't waste my tution money on it.
My MythTV HowTo
...at www.ruckus.net.
The link in the article didn't seem to work.
I still can't find anything about what makes this legal, but the company claims it numerous times.
How many music downloaders has the RIAA actually brought to court? Not very many. Almost all of the RIAA's attacks against downloaders have been settled out of court. They're more of a publicity stunt than they are a legal tactic. Now that I think of it, I can't remember any case where the RIAA has brought a music downloader to trial (not that there weren't any, there may have been) almost all of their real court cases are against companies that produce filesharing software. The reason, I believe, for this is that there is a big legal distinction between downloading somebody else's content and making money from other people downloading that content. I'm pretty sure that if someone accused of downloading music actually proceeded to go into court that they could have a reasonable chance at getting off. We'll probably never see that though because for someone to do this they would have to have the money to front for a lawyer, not to mention the time to see the case through.
This has been going on for quite some time now....And no university/coporation has ever been hunted down by the RIAA/MPAA/AAA....
The universities (so far) have been more than willing to turn in a few students...The lawsuits serve only to scare people from downloading..Most are settled, and I can't think of a suit that has actually gone to court over it.
When you think about it, there really isn't a case...The U is like an ISP, and no ISP has been seriously targeted over downloading (only for not willing to turn over info to the courts)
My MythTV HowTo
"...RUCKUS WILL NOT BE LIABLE TO ANYONE WITH RESPECT TO ANY DAMAGES, LOSS OR CLAIM WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH ACCESS TO OR USE OF THE CONTENTS OF THIS SITE. IN NO EVENT SHALL RUCKUS BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, INDIRECT, EXEMPLARY OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE, COPYING OR DISPLAY OF THE CONTENT..."
So where is the guarantee that this is in fact legal, and/or you won't get hunted down by the RIAA/MPAA? How is this not breaking copyright laws?
It sounds like a nice advertisement, but might be too good to be true. The adage, "There ain't such a thing as a free lunch.", rings true. They want personal information in return. Oh, and the privacy statement reads like adware/spyware.
If institutions are to adopt this for their College networks there has to be a guarantee in writing that I won't be sued for copyright infringement. Where is the guarantee I am legally licensing this for private use?
/^([Ss]ame [Bb]at (time, |channel.)){2}$/
I used to have an emusic account way back in the day, when they were unlimited. It was great to be able to download legally independent label music(the stuff worth listening to) where my money went to the artist. Of course any time you deal with a corporation, you run into problems. They double billed me for no reason and refused to refund my money(yeah, WTF). So I canceled and managed to get my music other ways. But I'm not scared the RIAA is going to come after me, I don't have their music. Because it's crap.
that's true, also backwards it Sukur...
scott king
Music isn't free.
Period.
This is not "blanket extortion," and really, with the money that the music industry rakes in, five bucks a month is probably more akin to their anal cavities being violated than anyone else's -- Not Everyone Pirates Music, ya know.
$5/student is a good deal.
Let's put it in perspective.
TV is broadcast. Why shouldnt it be free?
They're sending out one signal.. What's one more box on the cable system? It's not costing them anything.
Yet I bet most of you (myself included) pay over $75 a month for this, in one form or another (mine is near $100, for DirecTV and a couple DirecTiVos).
But music.. $5 a month.. is extortion?
Reality check.... cmon....
Ok.. i'm currently an NIU student... in Grant Towers (tower B on the 8th Floor). And this is the first time that I heard of this. I dont remember EVER paying 5 dollars a month for anything related to "A Ruckus" or anything of that sort. So i could not tell you. But I will takea trip two floors down and try it out for you guys and give you some clue how it goes. But for now... WinMX and BT still work for me :)
Those kind of deals are at last starting to make sense. First there was not option for downloading legal digital content. Even if the technology was easily available to the corporations who could sell the stuff, they where refusing to sell it. My opinion was then "fuck them" I will download my stuff for free because they are fucking greedy bastards so me too I will be a greedy bastard.
Then they started offering some digital content at prices almost as ridiculous than the prices of the CD's that they sell on store but a least, you where able to select the songs that you want without buying the whole album. I was happy to see the progress but this wasn't good enough for me. "Fuck them, they can do better than that" was my opinion.
Now those deals are starting to make sense. The only problem is that I am not a student anymore and I don't live on a campus. I would be interested to pay for a deal that give me those kind of options.Because they are not offering that to me right now... Well... Fuck them.
Yahh, hiii haaaaa! -Major Kong, from Dr. Strangelove
Why dont you get it ? Parent was saying he DOES NOT WANT ITMS. He wasnt saying he was going to steal the music from elsewhere. I dont want iTMS. I buy my music at higher quality in a shop.
What is it you dont understand about this ?
Im now charging YOU $5 a month for the right to listen to my next door neighbours dog barking.
Please mail it to me.
Its exactly the same thing.
Extortion, pure and simple.
What ever happened to "buying" a book. Or a CD. Or a single track from a CD that only you want?
This is like saying, pay us X per month, and then whenever you want to, you can download a book. Wouldn't you really rather just pay Y (which may be close to X) for the book, and then take it with and read ("play") it whenever/wherever you want?
Subscriptions are all about long-term area under the curve. Once you suck somebody into paying X every month (whether X be $5 for this service, or +$30 for cable video), those dollars really add up over the long term.
Unless you are a fairly regular user of the service, monthly subscriptions rarely make sense over purchasing and owning your own copy of the media and its content.
Oh yeah: The University may be "paying" the $5 subscription here, but of course they will pass it on to students. So service fees (or tuitions) rise.
The RIAA is still served, having passed the cost of their monopoly on to the end consumer. Previously accepted copyright practice is compromised in the process.
As hard as it is to believe, some of us didn't really listen to music in college. Also, some people may have ethical or religious objection to giving blanket payments to a group of artists who would include rap, punk, or even (yikes) Barry Manilow.