iPods Valuable in the College Classroom?
Infonaut writes "The Christian Science Monitor has an interesting article called When iPod goes collegiate, examining the iPods for students program at Duke University. It seems that while many students and professors find them valuable for classwork, this is America, so questions about intellectual property rear their ugly head: "Do they have permission from the person who wrote the lectures to share it?" asks one IP attorney, referring to lectures recorded on iPods."
I have the right to make a copy to listen to it later (or to share with other students).
Some of the most popular student uses included recording lectures, taking oral notes, and even using the devices to create electronic flash cards.
Professors reported that students seemed more engaged in classes where they could use the iPods. They also cited strong student use of the audio capabilities of the iPod in their presentations, and more accuracy in quoting from interviews they did using the iPods.
How long will this last? If a new device comes out, an iPod-killer so to speak, will students require those to succeed in school? If so, this says more about students and the education system than about iPods and their perceived educational benefits.
iPods, without a $30 add-on, can't record. What else are non-music students doing academically with the iPods?
For $10,000 a year in tuition, yes, I do own the lectures!
"Hey, Taco, let's post yet another story about something that's been done for decades with tape recorders...only now it's with IPODS!!!!!"
Yeah, amazing. How is using a modded iPod (they can't record out of the box) different from using a tape recorder? The hard disk? Whoop-dee-fuckin'-do.
It's different because it generates publicity. Looks like their plan to dominate the media with iPod stories is working. Speaking of a generic recording device is completely uninteresting... but an iPod? Start the hype engine! Create controversy where none exists! Get it posted on slashdot! This is the Marketing 202 course that Apple and other media outlets excel in. How many people would click through to a Christian Science Monitor (hah, what an oxymoron) article about analog tape recorders? But if CSM spins it as an "iPod against the machine" story, it gets impressions which generates ad revenues for them.
Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
... from handwritten lecture notes?
Unless you're really fast at shorthand and are taking dictation, handwritten notes aren't a verbatim copy of what was said but rather the important points that you think you ought to remember.
Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
It's different for the same reason that tape-trading wasn't a cause for an RIAA manhunt in the 80s. Copying a tape takes effort and time, while copying an mp3 takes neither. I'd LOVE to be redoing my undergraduate education now. Remember all the lecture-hall classes? Now everybody's got recorders that speak the same format -- and instead of having to borrow the tape from my pal, copy it, keep up with it, and give it back, I just ask him to IM it to me. Ten minutes later I have the entire hour-and-a-half long lecture (no more flipping tapes or keeping up with labels!).
It's different because it's easy enough for lazy students to do.
- They've got lots of middle-to-upper-middle class students with parents that are paying for college. The students often have a large part of the decision power.
- Duke offers the students iPods to buy their vote of approval, then simply tacks on a few hundred to the bill. (and don't give me any crap about it not adding to the bill. It's someones money spent on something that could have been spent somewhere else. That's that)
- Students go to Duke
- Profit
Being a high school, senior fresh out (almost) of the application process, I see that this fits Duke's reputation among high school students extremely well. Duke is very popular among the jock/suburban/upper middle class kid kinda person. People who've got life going pretty easily and all that really matters is the schools good sports teams and the "cool" factor.Do they have permission from the person who wrote the lectures to share it?" asks one IP attorney, referring to lectures recorded on iPods.
This is almost funny, I thought that sharing knowledge is what learning is all about! Is there no limit to what these slimebag IP lawyers will try to profit from? What will these intrepid legal eagles tackle next? After all one might actually argue that the process of learning is coping, or downloading somebody elses IP into ones brain. Will students still have permission to record lectures with their brains or do his concerns with IP theft end with iPods and tape recorders?
One thing I am sure of, I wish digital voice recording had been this easy back when I was at Uni. If I was a Uni student today I would definetly record all key lectures with my iPod and store them on my Linux boxen and I could care less about IP.
Only to idiots, are orders laws.
-- Henning von Tresckow
You're confusing the issue of the copyright on the recording of an audio work (P) vs. the copyright on the written version of the same work (C). While a recording of plain spoken word doesn't necessarily benefit from (P) protection (as you say, depends if it's original or not), the text conveyed by the word most certainly.
Put it another way, reading a piece of copyrighted text doesn't instantly make that text public domain.
First of all, I would like to state for the record that I am against all copyright law except insofar as it prevents fraud. (ie. You have no moral right to prevent me from doing whatever I wish with any work/idea I know/possess. However, I cannot claim that I created a work if I did not in fact do so)
That being said, in regards to copyright law as it stands (all Berne convention signatories) the parent is wrong. Speech may in fact be in-eligible for copyright. However, the prof most likely made notes, and otherwise prepared for his lecture. These are eligible for copyright and gain copyright protected status the momment they are created. The recording of the lecture could be considered a derivative work of the profs preparatory work. Thus both the recorder and the prof would have copy control over the recording and it would require both their consent to further distribute it.
IANAL. Any laywers or other IANAL's please correct me.
The works of Bach are in the public domain, but a particular performance of a work by Bach can be copyrighted.
Consider history books. The events described may have occured a thousand years ago, but the book itself is still under copyright.