Slashdot Mirror
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."
It's easier to zone out with a little music.
The means to record and share recordings of lectures have been around for quite a while. I know back in the dark ages when I was in school, most profs already had policies in regards to this. Why would doing this with an ipod as opposed to a tape recorder be any different?
It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
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.
that my school gets a grant for those Playboy iPods..
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!
Infonaut writes "Blah blah blah..."
Huh? Sorry, I was listening to my iPod while you were talking...
They are iValuable.
"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.
Substitute pocket tape recorder for iPod and many of the concerns are the same.
I stikes me that this is the result of, "hey, I have a great idea... let's give all the frosh iPods!"
"Uh, what will they do with them?"
"I dunno, we'll figure something out."
It sure seems like the Duke program could have been better thought out, though sometimes the best ideas for a device are not envisioned by its creators, so something good may come from this.
Wht I really want to know is why the fvck does Duke, a school that costs a gazillion dollars a year, need to get a grant to give its students iPods?
"I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey
Who owns the IP on the lecture? The professor, or maybe it's the university who paid for it... Seems that a simple university policy could deal with this...
Copyright applies to works "fixed in a tangible medium."
Lectures, by and large, are NOT fixed in a tangible medium... unless the professor is literally reading word-for-word from his notes, the lecture has not been fixed into a tangible medium and is therefore not subject to copyright.
In fact, it only becomes subject to copyright when it is recorded on the iPod (and is fixed in a tangible medium).
Depending on whether a classroom is considered a "public area" this could mean that the student, not the professor, holds the copyright to the recording so produced. If it is not a "public area" I'm not sure what the statute is, though, and whether or not you would need permission of the professor to do so.
Which brings up the issue of permission; most professors I knew were more than happy to let you record their lectures in college for a classmate provided you asked first. If the professor's lecture is his own work (and one presumes it is), he has the right to allow you to make copies (he holds the copyright) and the problem is solved.
Simply put, lawyer is being an asshat and looking to stir up more controversy. Oh, and our IP laws are f*cking broken.
IANAL, TINLA.
Dr. AC's 10 step plan:
1. Listen to iPod during class
2. Ignore professor
3. Cheat on the homeworks
4. Freak out b/c you don understand
5. Cheat on the exam
6. Make an A
7. Cheat in all other classes
8. ???
9. Live a fraudulent lifestyle
10. Profit!!!
Being the Mac, iPod, and gadget in general fan that I am it pains me to say this, but I don't see the point in this. It's cool, but that's all.
I was in college in the early 90's and recorded my lectures on a $30 tape recorder--and it did me no good. Recording lectures doesn't help everyone. I also didn't have a computer. I had a 3.5gpa though so I did something right.
Neat gadgets do not make you a good student.
Goddammit I hate IP attorneys.
...and all of you have full rights to use that whereever you want.
Hades, PoD: Official Advocate
You would think the $30,000+/year I'm paying in tuition gives me a "license" to share a lecture with my classmates.
Also, how many people outside of those in the class are interested in it anyway?
>this is America
No it's frigging not. I'm not in America.
Please repeat after me: "Other countries than America exist."
... 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.
Here at Middlebury College we are working on projects to use iPods as study aids in foreign-language courses:
http://segue.middlebury.edu/sites/achapin-ipod
The two uses are as follows:
1. Give students mobile access to our databases of tens of thousands of vocabulary audio files while using the rating system to sort known versus unknown vocabulary.
2. Allow students to record and hear themselves speaking vocabulary and other exercises.
"When ideology and theology couple, their offspring are not always bad but they are always blind." -- Bill Moyers
"Listen up or I'll take away your ipod"
Engineering is the art of compromise.
Just record audiobooks, and buy some cheaper iPod so the school can afford it. 20GB version of the iPod is obviously a bit too expensive, and the people at Duke who took the initiative to buy those iPods should have thought of cheaper models... even the iPod Mini.
:-/
I highly doubt one lecture will take more than 200MB? Unless... nah, no professor can be THAT boring...
Debugging? Klingons do not debug. Bugs are good for building character in the user.
Seeing that iPods cost so much it's a shame Apple has seen fit to limit their recording ability so they sound like scratchy tin-cans on the best of days. I've heard them and it's not pretty. I recommend a non-limited recorder with a *real* pre-amped mic.
Da Blog
It's a Nokia 6600 but the emulator should run on any Symbian 60 based phone.
There is also a Gameboy/Gameboy Color emulator and a *gasp* SNES emulator (although it's too slow on current processors).
- NES Emulator
- GB/GBC Emulator
- SNES Emulator
João Pinheiro
Who cares about recorded lessons? The real issue is, does a student have a right to remember or use, let alone share any information gained from a lecture (or a book or whatever) without written permission from the lecturer (or the author or whatever)? After all, isn't that protected IP?
I mean, just think about it... The student might some day be a lecturer himself, so what right does he have to distribute the IP he may have memorized?
I wonder why for example NSTA hasn't taken such a firm stand on IP issues, like MPAA and RIAA have. Such lackluster attitude towards these serious issues will undermine the future of modern society!
A: "Apple is providing project management expertise and technical and functional resources."
when i took business law back in the day, the lecturer was a former chief prosecutor and had lots of experience. but if there was one policy he enforced, it was that we were NOT allowed to record his lectures. that sucked, since most of the test material was from his lectures. his stated reason was that because he will (and did) say controversial stuff, as well as mentioning specifics of certain cases (without naming names), if there was a recording of what he said out there, it *could* be used against him. it was his way of protecting himself. so i imagine in this day and age of mp3's and decentralized distribution, i can see how a) some professors could have a problem with their lectures free floating out there or b) see devices such as an iPod as the greatest invention since the typewriter in helping them teach...
There are no copyright issues whatsoever in recording someone speaking. The spoken word does not qualify for copyright protection. Period.
Title 17, 102(1):
(a) Copyright protection subsists, in accordance with this title, in original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression
The spoken word is not a tangible medium of expression.
When it is recorded, the recording can qualify for copyright protection (if it's original enough, and meets all the other requirements), but that copyright belongs to the person making the recording, not the person being recorded.
There can be other issues regarding the use of someone's voice, but those are not copyright issues.
The professors quoted in this article desperately need a remedial course in copyright law.
Duke either has an IP lawyer with too much time on his/her hands (probably) or a few professors who took way too many drugs as undergraduates and forget the nuances of the experience (probably)
"All successful systems accumulate parasites" -- Hal Hixon
- 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.Hmm... I think it is because it is in a digital format that potentially can be distributed to millions of people.
A tape cassette doesn't inherently share that property.
The Internet is full. Go Away!!!
Do lawyers actually have the right to make work by stirring up trouble and finding reasons to sue people? Isn't that a bit like an auto body shop that covers the streets in nails & broken glass?
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 are paying for the lecture, and the professor is performing it as a work for hire - that is what he/she is paid to do. At least that should be the relationship between the professor and the university. If not allowing recording inhibits the learning process, that is a very serious matter. For example, I do not have a good "auditory" memory but am more of a visual person, so I always had to record the more difficult classes to go over the words later. This was years ago, no questions asked. Has the IP fetish gotten to the point where now some professors don't allow recording lectures anymore? If I went to school now, would I have to have a note-taker assigned to me from disability services for all my classes then? And what if the note-taker can't take good notes (by not having the prerequisites and being unfamiliar with the material)? Seriously, I'd be up in arms about something preventing me from getting the education I was paying through the nose for.
iPod Experiment
Duke iPod program to continue next year
Also, you can go to The Chronicle and search the archives for "iPod" and get any number of negative student editorials on the topic. Basically, all of us at Duke agreed that the project was a marketing campaign, plain and simple; on the other hand, you won't see us complaining. We got free (as in, paid for by a fund accumulated from previous years) iPods, and next year's freshmen will get them if they take the appropriate classes.
In addition, Carolina can go to hell. Go Devils :-P
Apple never intended for them to be used as audio recorders, and they have no control over the quality of third party dongles.
Your analogy is flawed or, rather, you are too passive. These are not "third party dongles", these are licensed and manufactured in partnership with Apple (that provides the firmware support and allows access to the iPod's innards). You don't get Apple's blessing, you don't get very far. Look at the incredibly slow progress the iPod Linux has made relative to, say, RockBox. This is because Apple actively works to lock out unauthorised development.
The iPod's hardware seems well capable of supporting high-fidelity recording, both analog and digital. The PortalPlayer PP5002B chipset (and derivatives on current models) used in all the big iPods since the early days is capable, according to PortalPlayer itself, of encoding MP3, WAV, AIFF, WMA, and ATRAC3 at up to 320Kbit/s.
A little over a year ago iPods switched to the Wolfson WM8731L ADC/DAC ($5 each in small lots!), which can sample at 44.1kHz, 48kHz or 96kHz. I haven't kept up with current iPod offerings because they are of little interest to me but I would assume Apple has not regressed on the ADC capabilities. It's hard these days to spend more than $3 on a signal chip and *not* get high-quality ADC. I note that most of the other players based on a similar PortalPlayer/Wolfson platform (eg Samsung, Philips, iRiver) offer high-fidelity recording.
So you see you are wrong. The iPod's lack of high-fidelity sound recording is not the fault of "third party dongles", it is not a limitation of iPod hardware, it is simply that Apple has chosen to intentionally limit the available quality of the recording function. As to why Apple would choose to cripple the iPod this way, many people probably have different opinions on that. personally, I feel that it's Apple's way of making nice with the RIAA.
Da Blog
Unless they're getting kickbacks from Apple as some other /.ers have suggested.
Who am I to blow against the wind? -- Paul Simon
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.
I expect that in the not too distant future, electronic devices will be widely used to assist people with sensory or neurological defects, and to enhance "normal" people. Some people have natural gifts that allow them to remember and reproduce, images, music, the spoken word, etc. What happens to "intellectual property" and "no pictures or recording allowed" when these artificial sensory augmentations become common? Is the RIAA going to ban me from concerts or sue me because my audio processor implant has a memory chip? What if I wear a computerized vision correction/enhancement device?
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
That's missing the point entirely.
It's the *presentation* of the information which is the professor's intellectual property.
Happily telling the world all the facts he told you isa legal.
Selling recordings of the lecture is not.
hawk