Slashdot Mirror
University of Kansas Adopts 'One Strike' Copyright Infringement Policy
NewmanKU writes "Eric Bangeman at Ars Technica writes that the University of Kansas has adopted a new, and very strict, copyright infringement policy for the students on the residential network. The university's ResNet website states that, 'Violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act is against the law. If you are caught downloading copyrighted material, you will lose your ResNet privileges forever. No second notices, no excuses, no refunds. One violation and your ResNet internet access is gone for as long as you reside on campus.' According to a KU spokesperson, KU has received 345 notices in the past year from organizations and businesses regarding complaints about copyrighted material downloading."
Tough luck pal, due process only applies in court. They'd have to follow it if they decided to sue you, throw you in jail for whatever, or something like that.
Cutting you off the campus net is an entirely private decision, no due process required by law.
Think of it like getting banned from a forum because the admin thinks you are a troll.
TFA mentions that Stanford and other schools charge high "Reconnection" fees after they block your MAC for sharing files. Why don't they just do something like that and make a load of money?
"Zero-tolerance" is all about moralism, and rarely about correcting behavior, or "teaching" people anything. It'll have a good effect statistically, but the people who get their privileges pulled won't have their attitude changed, they'll just conclude the "RIAA-Nazis" blackmailed his school into screwing with his education.
It doesn't matter how true it is, rules must give the appearance of fairness in order to be respected.
Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
Nah, students wont cancel the accounts because they need them, instead what needs to be done is someone file copyright infringement claims against *every* student, and since this rule applies to claims and convictions they will all be required to lose their accounts.. showing how stupid this sort of rule is.
MABASPLOOM!
Yep. In fact, as a signatory to the Berne Convention, in the US copyright exists in every work not explicitly released into the publci domain. Which makes it a particularly stupid thing to say. I mean it is fairly obvious that they mean "no unauthorised downloading of copyright material", but if they really plan to implement a "no excuses, no appeal" policy, you'd think they'd take the 30 seconds or so it needed to phrase the thing correctly.
Even then, it's still way OTT. Half the papers on Citeseer (for instance) are there in technical violation of the copyright of the journals where they were first published. The journals turn a blind eye, which is why the site can keep on, but I can see a lot of sudents getting banned, which considering how widely used citeseer is as an academic resource, is a but ridiculous.
I suppose the only other way they could implement the policy as expressed is to rely on the word "caught". That way, if they don't look for downloaders, they don't find them, and selective enforcement becomes the order of the day. I suppose it might be useful if the they forsee needing a pretext to silence unruly students.
Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton!
Ahh yes, because somewhere along the line "guilty until proven innocent" became the de facto standard.
We get riled up because of all the kneejerk reactions that create more problems than they solve. Sure, it might superficially seem ok, but the potential for abuse is so high, it's patently absurd.
Clearly, this is a great place to begin a multi-year commitment towards higher education.
They clearly place the interests of their customers first and foremost.
I'm going to send that university a letter telling them I'm not hiring any of their graduates because of their asinine behavior.
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
So you're planning on punishing the students for the University being dicks?
Seems like you're just adding to the pile of crap the students have to put up with.
"paid for by tax payers, in the case of public schools"
I didn't realize tuition was free.
No seriously, I wonder why copyright infringement was singled out. If you park illegally on campus, do they remove your parking privileges forever? If you take more than your fair share in the dorm cafeteria, can you no longer eat on campus?
Sounds just alleging copyright violations at KU carries one of the harshest penalties. I wonder if you don't properly attribute your sources in a paper if they break your fingers? Anyway, if I was on the internet at KU, I'd try to encrypt all my traffic. Some idiotic letter comes from an RIAA lawyer, and the next thing you know, you might as well leave school.