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."

Comments

Good idea

[NG Resonance]

I'd pay for a service like this. Not too expensive, and keeping me safe from RIAA/MPAA attacks.

Re:Good idea

[Proc6]

This is like the third time in 24 hours I've read this analogy and it's really lame.

If you don't pay mafia protection fees, then "bad things happen to you".

If you don't pay the RIAA for its monthly fee or buy it's content, then the only things that could happen to you (such as not listening to Britney Spears) are good.

If you're referring to the court cases brought against people who were file-sharing and infringing on copyrights, then I don't think a monthly college file sharing fee protects you if you continue to file-share copyrighted works that aren't part of the deal. It's safe to assume if you pay a $5 a month college file-sharing fee, then rip your copy of Lord of the Rings and put it up on eMule, you can very well still find yourself in court.

Stop with the knee jerk quip karma bait comments.

Re:Good idea

[Douglas_E_Morris]

In the end this service is not unlike others you would get at a university. While I am sure this is not the same for all Universities, the one where I go to school at sells you services such as your phone, your cable, your internet (at least it is high speed) and this is all built into the price. The reason the prices are the way that they are is bulk pricing. Everyone chips in a little and it does not seem so bad overall. Also, as a member of Residence Hall Council we get to vote and approve such 'manditory fees' for services in the halls, and while i agree it seems rude to force fees on people we can often get services for all at the price of $5.00 per person where to simply leave one person out would raise the price as high as $20.00 per person because it is not 'all'. When we vote in these fees it is done in the intrest of all students, not just a few. We try to get the best deals we can, and offer the services that are wanted at discouted rates. You accept certain limitations by living in a residence hall, you likly have quite hours, you are reqiured to follow the house rules, and you agree to the manditory fees. It is alot like living in a house that is under the rule of a housing association. In wrap up this was not written to draw the ire of anyone, just to give another perspective that might not otherwise be viewed. Doug Morris

Re:Good idea

[silicon not in the v]

The problem with this is that some students who don't end up using the service, pay for it anyway. Students who don't have computers pay the same price for residence, even though high speed internet is included. ...gym. ...library. ...books.

Yeah, my taxes pay for jails, but I don't get to use them. The criminals should pay for it. My taxes support schools, but I don't have any kids; that's not fair.[/sarcasm]
The same kind of thing happens in society, but it's especially true in a university setting. You are getting access to amazing stuff because of the economy of scale of the students that are there. You get to use science and electronics lab equipment that you could never hope to afford. You get to use expensive software packages--autocad and such--that you could not get, gym and fitness facilities, high speed internet, etc., etc. Plus if you act now, you'll also get this great education that will help you get a job! And here's the best part: it's not like taxes where you have to pay it. If you don't like the service package of a university, DON'T GO. Or if you prefer, go to a smaller college or community college that is cheaper and has less features. Would you whine and cry about some place that sells a $15,000 computer that's packed with features you would never use? Instead, choose the one that has the things you do want at a reasonable price.

Yay...

[geminidomino]

Force students to pay whether they want the Uni to sell their souls to the RIAA or not.

Nothing new here. Move along.

Re:Yay...

[geminidomino]

I see this less as "Selling music" and more as "blanket extortion."

"Pay us $5/student or risk being sued."

Doesn't sound like "sales" to me.

Re:Yay...

[ChairmanMeow]

Force students to pay whether they want the Uni to sell their souls to the RIAA or not.

That's what makes me angry... The college I go to signed a deal with iTunes, which basically means that students will be forced to pay an RIAA tax in their tuition, regardless of whether the students actually use the service or not. In my case, I don't want to use iTunes, and since there's no Linux client I can't use it anyway (yes, I know about the Crossover Office story a few days ago, but I'm not going to install Crossover Office to use the iTunes software I don't want). Also, going to a private college is expensive enough without bring forced to pay for academically useless things such as iTunes. Personally, I think it should be at the most an opt-in program: that is, students who wanted to use iTunes would opt-in to the program which would be organized by the college, and the fee would be added to their bill. In that case, any student that did not want to participate in that program would not sign up, and those who did want to participate would sign up. Then again, since when was there reason in the music downloading discussion?

Re:Yay...

[squiggleslash]

I wonder if Shawn Fanning ever realized that this was the logical end point of the revolution he started - deliberately create a network that makes it easy to infringe artist's rights and makes it difficult to identify specific infringers, and you end up with a situation where the innocent - be it "every broadband user" (as proposed by El Reg and the EFF - I'm serious, both are proposing the solution to P2P is a compulsory broadband tax) or in this case, "every student", ends up having to pay for the music instead, with the RIAA and MPAA desperately leveraging any single point of liability they can find.

Kind of sucks, doesn't it? Everyone suffers because two groups - artists and copyright infringers - decide to take everything to the most extreme extents they can.

legal? not fun

[Anonymous Coward]

if its not illegal it's no fun.

screw it.

Cornell's Trial Download Program

[crem_d_genes]

Cornell is giving away music downloads this year.

Good use

[Nos.]

At least we're starting to see the Industry start using the technology to everyone's advantage instead of trying to quash it. Of course I'm in Canada and I'm pretty safe right now from the letters (mind you, I haven't downloaded an MP3 in a LONG time either). Of course with Morpheus's recent win in court, this sort of 'legal' P2P system may not catch on as well as hoped. Have to admit though, if I knew I could get high quality, legal MP3's I'd probably consider paying the $5/month.

I must have missed something....

[marshac]

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.

Re:I must have missed something....

[paulthomas]

It looks like they are partnering with individual labels and producers to get a (likely meager) cut to the copyright holder so everything is kosher. Otherwise they're probably just banking on Sound Exchange and paying flat royalties for Sound Exchange to distribute later on. This is how most radio stations work (Pay to a big holding group that redistributes based on a variety of factors like album sales).
Also, it looks like the P2P part may only be a mechanism to locally cache and distribute content that they've licensed to reduce their overhead. The files are also Windows Media and "tethered" according to the article.

Paul

PS. I wrote the company to complain about the damn auto-playing music on the web site. This is no longer 1996!

Don't waste my money!

[thewldisntenuff]

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.

$5/month is nothing...

[b0r1s]

$5/month is nothing compared to what they're going to be paying for the bandwidth used up by all of the downloading.

Working company URL...

[photonagon]

...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.

Let me get this straight...

[hazman]

These students can download or stream music, television and movies (presumably fairly recent releases in a VOD arrangement) for $5 a month? And I'm paying $70 a month for my DSS service which has nothing on demand? And it's legal?

This begs a few observations:

There is no way this service will make it into the real world at this price.

or

This service is not legal.

or

My rectum problems are NOT due to a lack of fiber in my diet.

Porn?

[iamdrscience]

I get the feeling though that unlike most "illegal" networks, this one has considerably less porn.

Obviously, it would be worthless to me.

Here's a copy

[matz62]

Monday, August 23, 2004

Ruckus starts in Grant with new downloading tool for students
Network may expand to other residence halls if it is successful

Article by:
Michelle Gibbons - Staff Reporter
mgibbons@northernstar.info


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.

Ajuluchukwu, who heard about Ruckus from his roommate, said he would definitely recommend the program to other students.

It was better than other programs because its legal, Ajuluchukwu said. This is a good idea for the university to do for the students so we have some entertainment.

Ruckus is a digital entertainment and downloading service that will provide music, movies, TV shows, local content and community features to students free of charge, said Joseph Marone, Ruckus account representative for NIU. NIU pays $5 per student per month and is allowed unlimited access to the media for the testers.

On Thursday, Ruckus will be available for testing to residents in the third through sixth floors of all Grant Towers, said Keith Kruchten, president of the Residence Hall Association.

Marone said NIU is very important to Ruckus development.

This is the first time weve opened this program up to a school. We want to make sure students enjoy it.

Still in the pilot testing process, the program is not only tested by students, but also developed and designed by graduate students from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Marone said.

From Aug. 12 to Aug. 19, more than 20 NIU community advisers and Grant Towers staff tested Ruckus, and on Aug. 19, 170 students were added to the testing. By Aug. 26, a total of 700 NIU students will be linked to Ruckus.

On Sept. 1, about 2,500 students in all Grant Towers will have limited access to the network. The full model of Ruckus will be open to all Grant students in October, Kruchten said.

The network is located at www.betaruckus.net.

Ruckus is tethered so students can still download music and movies without officially owning, buying or burning downloads, said Marone.

He said students can share playlists and compare theirs with other students likes and dislikes.

Kruchten also said even though the program is limited, students have been very impressed with what has been available thus far.

© 2004 Northern Star. All Rights Reserved.

content is king

[martin-boundary]

The article seems weak on explaining exactly what you get for $5/month. One of the big attractions of filesharing software is the timely content being shared.

The most popular downloads, which also account for the greatest bandwith used, are things like the latest DVD movies, theatre camera captures, popular albums. That's a simple fact, whether it's legal or not.

I can't believe Ruckus or any other small media company is ever going to be able to offer these kinds of downloads on their networks. I mean, is WB going to make a deal with them so that they can distribute movies at $5/month right at the same time as those movies are released in theatres?

So then, what kind of content *can* they distribute? Movies that came out two years ago, or Britney Spears' very first album, I guess. The same stuff that's on free to air TV.

In that case, there is still going to be alternative "illegal" networks for sharing the latest popular media, and I suspect that the illegal networks will stay much more popular.

Why is the university paying?

[iamdrscience]

This download network, like many other legal, commercial networks that have struck deals with colleges, is paid for by the university, not by the students themselves. I never really understood this. I mean, I know most schools feel that it is in some way their responsibility to pay for their students entertainment, i.e. concerts and other performances, fairs, etc., but this seems like going a little over the edge. I mean, NIU has 25,000 students, so if they were to pay for this program for all of their students it would be 25,000 students times $5 times let's say 8 months of school (plus whatever they pay for the kids that are there in the summer) or $1,000,000. That's a lot of money to add onto whatever they budget for student entertainment functions.

Excerpt from their legal page

[atomic-penguin]

"...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?

Re:here's my guess on how it works

[YrWrstNtmr]

hey, I dont know much about how licensing keys and DRM stuff work

This should have been your first line, and you should have stopped there.

Speculation is useless.

"Legal" file downloading system?

[Anonymous Coward]

University Tests Legal File Downloading System

File downloading services are not, in and of themselves, legal or illegal. They simply exist. What makes file downloading systems legal or illegal is what people do with them.

Much like Grokster and Kazaa were recently ruled to not violate the law, FTP, HTTP, Samba, AppleTalk, and other file transfer technologies are perfectly legal.

The title would be better stated as "University tests new copyright management system". That's what this system really is, an RIAA sanctioned music distribution system wrapped in DRM.

Define Illegal

[LuYu]

Dorm students at Northern Illinois University are testing a legal file downloading service.

Which is to say that all other downloading is "illegal", right?

This is the problem with the current debate. It seems that "file downloading" has become "illegal" in general because of the political campaigns by the RIAA/MPAA to change the way we think. This is more than a little wrong. Just because the *AAs say it is wrong or illegal, does not make it so. These are the same people who claimed that Spiderman [I] did not make any money so they would not have to pay Stan Lee.

All file sharing systems, yes, including P2P, are capable of and indeed to share lots of legal files every day. There is no "system" for legal downloads. All systems can carry legal downloads.

This is a system for controlled sales of *AAs products. Warning. Lanugage, when used in the wrong way, can be hazardous to your freedom.

Re:Think of the rhyming possibilities for 'Ruckus'

[scottking]

that's true, also backwards it Sukur...

Reality Check

[Kioti]

If a system like this was ever supported by the MPAA/RIAA does anyone really think $5 a month would be the going rate here in the USA? More like $5 a song. The theft will never stop until the RIAA/MPAA stop alienating their customers. An amazingly large percentage of this country would actually tell you that the RIAA/MPAA are getting exactly what they deserve. The same group would then tell you that it's wrong to steal a candy bar. It has nothing to do with a misunderstanding or dis-association due to the internet. It has to do with people legitimizing the theft because they are angry and they know they have no other recourse in this country. File sharing has become a grass roots campaign to punish the music industry.

Re:Do you people not understand?

[geminidomino]

Reality check:

$5/student, whether the student WANTS IT OR NOT, just to prevent lawsuits. That IS textbook extortion.

You don't think this cost is gonna be passed onto the students, even the ones who don't even OWN computers?