Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Pushes Copyright Education Curriculum
Dotnaught writes "Backed by a study that says teens show more respect for copyrights when told of possible jail time for infringement, Microsoft is launching a new intellectual property curriculum to educate kids about IP law. To support its teachings, Microsoft has launched MyBytes, a Web site where students can create custom ringtones, share content — "their own content," as Microsoft makes clear — and learn more about intellectual property rights."
How we know is more important than what we know.
I have no problems at all with educating kids on copyright law (at about the same time that other civics classes are taught), but this just reeks of propaganda.
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
...All in all you're just another brick in the wall
All this will do is teach the kids IP is a corporate crock to be obliterated when they are in power, and open doors to possibilities about 'free' stuff they never even thought of.
What they should do is try to give value to purchasing a right to use, not just trying to scare kids.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
I know that copying music is illegal, so will the kids before this and after this. We all know copying music is illegal, why try to educate me more on something i care to know little about. I know it's wrong, that's enough for me.
;)
Note to the MPAA: This statement does not indicate that I copy music, purely that I know it's illegal
I bet microsoft ends up owning your content on their website, just like http://www.flickr.com/.
If I were to upload a track by an RIAA artist to that MyBytes site, and it converts it to a ringtone, then I guess Microsoft will be an accessory to copyright theft/stealing/infringement. It might have some algorithms to help protect from that, but then you could sample other tracks.
:)
RIAA vs Microsoft over shitty ringtones. Watch the sparks fly
Looks like something from the past "Backed by a study that says shopkeepers show more respect for mafia when told of possible accidents for not accepting the insurance, The mafia inc. is launching a new ...."
The citizens will also take over their governments..
"an infinite player that has lost his finite mind" ~Infinite Play the Movie (it blends with reality)
When you create a profile, one of the avatars you can pick is a copyright symbol.
Why on Earth does Microsoft care about this?
Are their interests so absolutely identical to Hollywood's? I mean really?
And do they "lose" so much from "piracy" of their software that it warrants this type of douchegaggish behavoir?
expandfairuse.org
Microsoft appear to be under impression that copyright applies to ideas,
in which case they would be the worlds most prominent serial copyright
infringer. Lucky for Microsoft then that this isn't the case.
There was a childs film-making competition a few years back organised
by first light in the UK where Microsoft sponsorship came with "ideas
can be copyrighted" nonsense. The other week we saw them repeat the same
bullshit in relation to Canadian copyright legislation. And now this?
The last people qualified to teach anyone about copyright is Microsoft.
From "copyrightable ideas" to stamping all over fair use with DRM,
they've demonstrated that they neither understand or respect copyright
law.
I know that copying music is illegal... I know it's wrong, that's enough for me.
See, that's the difference between the sheeple and informed people. You really don't know it's wrong. You've just been educated to think it's wrong.
As for me, I know that copying music is illegal in some countries, but I know it's NOT wrong - specially if the RIAA engages in monopolistic behavior.
Reality isn't black and white, my friend. And it doesn't have shades of gray either, that would be thinking in 1-D. Reality comes in COLORS. Some nice, some ugly. And there are many viewpoints.
As with all of Microsoft's forays in to the world of "hip" computing, I'm sure this will be a winner. They just need to make an introduction video with a token black guy, homosexual, and two teen girls... and then cripple the service.
In the beginning, there were computers... the hardware... the software was free. People were paid to write programs, but the programs weren't sold "as a product without guarantees." Then Bill Gates said "let there be profit where there was none!" And so there was.
And it came to pass that there was wailing and gnashing of teeth while Microsoft made billions upon billions of dollars and a monopoly was built.
And it came to pass that while open source and free software was never really gone, but it has regained popularity as much of the afore mentioned wailing and gnashing goes on. And as open source and industries using it gained popularity, there were flying chairs as well.
There are other ways to get your computers to deliver the results you want and it doesn't have to cost any money. Microsoft doesn't want anyone to know that so they'll frighten kids with fire and brimstone to protect their business model. Brilliant! But should Microsoft be teaching religion in schools? What they SHOULD be teaching is their programmers to write safe and secure code.
What makes a man turn neutral? Lust for gold? Power? Or were you just born with a heart full of neutrality?... If I die while writing this reply, tell my wife...hello.
09 f9 11 02 9d 74 e3 5b d8 41 56 c5 63 56 88 c0
I think they mean re-education ("therapy" a la A Clockwork Orange). BTW: I hope none of the ringtones they "create" sound too much like anything hollywood puts out. They might then get a first-hand lesson in IP (like the Verve with Bittersweet Symphony). -g
I have never found mere escape of punishment to be a good reason to do anything. I admit it can be motivation, but not a reason.
"Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
... MyBytes site users elect to release their content under the GPL.
Have gnu, will travel.
Zero
One or two
Three to seven
As many as I like; I own it. I think you know what to do...
I live in constant fear of the Coming of the Red Spiders.
Great tag. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Xfqkdh5Js4
What's the value of information that you don't know?
Instead of talking about the possible punishments, I would rather use arguments like:
1. "How would YOU like it if..." (fairness)
2. "Paying for ___ is exercising your dollar votes. By paying, you are establishing that ___ is good and is worthy of your support." (respect)
We pulled some disturbing numbers this past week about the amount of PC players currently playing CoD4 Multiplayer (which was fantastic). What wasn't fantastic was the percentage of those numbers who were playing on stolen copies of the game on stolen / cracked CD keys of pirated copies (and that was only people playing online).
Not sure if I can share the exact numbers or percentage of PC players with you, but I'll check and see; if I can I'll update with them. As the amount of people who pirate PC games is astounding. It blows me away at the amount of people willing to steal games (or anything) simply because it's not physical or it's on the safety of the internet to do.
I wonder how much of this Microsoft sponsered curriculum with cover public licensing.
Unfortunately, as a true slashdotter I am single with no kids, but if it were one of my kids that were being put through this indoctrination, I will give them a quick overview of the creative commons license and suggest that they applied it to all their uploaded content. Wouldn't that be interesting!
Children are thus raised to squeal and squawk whenever anyone seems to be "stealing IP" - which not only implies they dont copy games, music, etc. but in that they report infringement whenever they see it (parents, schools, comrades, jobs).
Years later, when every copy of every commercial product is dutifully paid for, more people than ever will be clamoring for alternatives to the expensive world of vendor-dictated pricing, feature and upgrade schedules.
And so, this generation will adopt FOSS earlier, knowing that their new laptop cannot handle [MS OS du jour] and they cannot buy new hardware, and [now] they dont want to "steal" some IP. "No! I would never steal IP! Thats why I use free stuff - its legal."
This can been seen a welcome thing for FOSS, as it really nails home that commercial software is gonna cost ya.
Just keep this crap away from public schools. This is the type of corporate propaganda that belongs in marketing, advertisements, and sponsored events. NOT in a tax-supported educational system.
And screw them all:
1) I not only make digital copies of software media, but I will happily provide a replacement to friends, family, or customers who lose theirs. Why? Because its the PRODUCT KEY which makes the magic, NOT the CD.
1a) I am sensitive, however, to certain products which just require media from a previous version to qualify for an upgrade. I do not just "hand out" copies; you have to prove to me that you legitimately own the product. And I am quite fond of saying "NO."
2) I make copies of my CDs in VBR MP3 format for use on my portable devices and home computers.
3) I rip and convert my DVDs for use on my portable devices.
Oh, and I do not always put caps back on pens, fold or hang my laundry, and every once in a while I also use the last of the toilet paper without replacing it.
I also do not use a single bit of pirated or unpaid software (I would say "unregistered," but there are a few free packages like RealPlayer I refuse to register due to spam issues.) No, really. But sometimes I wish I did, as it seems the pirates have fewer hurdles through which to jump and are able to spend more time enjoying software than dealing with licensing issues.
MS pushing copyright education (and the whole WGA thing) is somewhat ironic when you consider MS owes their monopoly almost entirely to piracy. And buy pushing this agenda, they actually are more at risk of pushing the install base to "get legal" with more economical alternatives (i.e. Linux).
Had MS not been the required platform for gaming through the 90s, users would have been less likely to become familiar and congregate around it. Since home users constantly needed the new whiz-bang DirectX or 32-bit OS support to keep gaming, and the shear ease by which your average person lost the OEM install disc, the number of pirated systems grew. When it came time for the hardware upgrade, they got another copy of Windows with the box, and then a year later, pirated another version of Windows over it to keep up with the new gaming features again. For every $5 lost OEM install (C'mon, who really goes out and buys a copy of Windows?), they made a few $50 sales of Age of Empires or Halo, or a $300 (never actually priced it) sale of Office. So MS owes perhaps the majority of its install base to pirate upgrades.
Had Vista not been such ass to deal with, almost certainly no one would be using XP today regardless of how awful it is. In one sense, it would just be a lot more logical for MS to declare Windows Home editions free for home use and keep that install base not looking over their shoulders and not learning about alternatives.
Do they tell you how to work the OEM / CAL / coa / ETC rules that some IT people have a hard time working them selfs?
As a high school teacher I'm all for this program.
That's why I downloaded it over bittorrent, made fifty copies and am selling the curriculum to other teachers for $50 a copy (digital). I'm so glad that Microsoft has found a way for me to make some money.
Thank you MS. You guys are the greatest!
Yeah, I'm as old as my UID would suggest.
I have not RTFA and I certainly won't take advantage of MS's education opportunity, but I suspect Silverlight will be part of this mess.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
Microsoft can leave it's grubby slime-caked mitts off my child.
MS education
what an oxymoron
I have no problems with educating kids on copyright law, so long as it's done correctly. In particular, I am opposed to "abstinence only" education. While it is true that abstaining from file sharing is an effective deterrent to its harmful effects (financial ruin, bankruptcy, incarceration if the RIAA gets its way), studies have shown that students in abstinence-only copyright education classes aren't any less likely to download copyrighted materials. Therefore, classes should also cover "safer" downloading practices, which effectively avoid the scrutiny of law-enforcement and reduce chances of being the victim of harmful effects of file-sharing. The use of encrypted connections and anonymizing networks such as Tor, and basic techniques used to procure copyrighted material from newsgroups rather than insecure p2p protocols, etc., would all be covered in a well designed cirriculum.
Is now playing IP defender/educator.
I guess it would have a ring of reality to it if Microsoft had changed its ways. However, it hasn't so this is farcical.
Education isnt just about teaching people about the law but also showing them solutions that fit their lifestyle. What would you bet that the Microsoft rep never mentions to the students that rather than breaking the law and stealing proprietary software they could download a FOSS solution and avoid all legal entanglements.
So...
When a grown-up told you that something was naughty what was the first thing you did when their back was turned?
Exactly. Expect copyright infringement to grow exponentially as a direct result of this MS program.
History is rife with Microsoft's violations of others' IP. I am not even going to start a list of incidents - Google it!
The whole point is: do as I do, not as I say. The single biggest thing Microsoft could do if they want IP respected is to lead by example. A short century or two of exemplary behavior should be enough to undo their past.
I wouldn't be so quick to judge this MyBytes site. I'd first give it some thought, before I recognize it as the typical media industry propaganda. It's interesting, however, to look at their model. Kids can "release" their tracks under "Free" licenses, even if they require people to pay for them. They also get to select what "rules" they believe media should be distributed under, with it looks like choices running the whole spectrum of "I bought it, it's mine and I can do what I want with it" to "It's wrong (morally) to share CD's".
While I hear the infernal tune in the background of this site, this site could be an interesting experiment. It keeps track of how many people download the songs without paying for them (with site credits, not money), and how many people pay for "free" tracks (among other things). I'm going to laugh real hard when their "anti-piracy" curriculum winds up teaching the media industry that people will actually pay for music that they're able to use as they desire.
I'd really like to play with this site some more, but it seems like you need IE to create a login or do downloads. Maybe my version of Flash is just out of date...
'Every story, if continued long enough, ends in death.' --Ernest Hemingway
Look at the laws we have about our roads today. Things like jaywalking now exist because the automotive industry wanted to educate children that the street is a place for cars and not for playing.
No compensation will be paid with respect to the use of your Submission, as provided herein. Microsoft is under no obligation to post or use any Submission you may provide and Microsoft may remove any Submission at any time in its sole discretion."
it won't do any good.
the cat is already out of the bag. kids today KNOW about ip rights. you think they don't? ha! really - HA! they know far more than you do, you cigar smoking fat old useless overpaid mafiaa guy.
the 'just say no to drugs' also had a real laugh of an impact on youth. they still do as they wish, just like when I was growing up all those decades ago. we were smart enough to know when we were being fed a line of bull and kids today are smarter, not dumber. at least street smarter; and that's what detects MS and the riaa/mpaa bullshit.
they saw my generation buy LP (well, they heard about it) and they saw us re-buy CD and then be told to re-buy the MP3. they can SEE, you idiots, they can see this all. and they have decided, apparently, to snub their noses at the fat cats.
I actually LIKE the fact that the youth are seen as 'lawless' toward IP. good! IP theory is stupid anyway and needs to be totally rethought.
imaginary property that you must pay for over and over again. farking absurd - and kids today know it.
have fun MS. throw money around. it means you have less left over. and that's certainly a good thing, isn't it?
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
Oh boy, corporate-sponsored propaganda taught in schools! I wonder who's going to jump at the opportunity to teach students which soft drink is best? Oh wait, I think that's whoever buys ad time on Channel 1.
Copying software is bad, mmmkay?
It's supposed to read MS Bytes
Ummm, if I were stranded on a desert island, the one device I'd wish to have was a 406Mhz PLB or EPIRB. I mean, come on.
Edith Keeler Must Die
More FUD from the TOU document:
What about fair use?
In limited situations, you can use copyrighted works without permission from the copyright holder. It can be difficult to figure out whether use of copyrighted works without permission is legal, though, because the laws in this area are often vague and vary from country to country.
The copyright law in the United States has a doctrine called "fair use". Fair use provides a defense to copyright infringement in some circumstances. For example, fair use allows documentary filmmakers to use very short clips of copyrighted movies, music and news footage without permission from the copyright owner. Fair use is a difficult concept because determining whether something is a fair use involves weighing four factors. Unfortunately, weighing the fair use factors rarely results in a clear-cut answer.
Rather than applying a fair use test, many other countries have specific exceptions to copyright infringement. The number and type of exceptions vary by country, but they frequently allow copyrighted materials to be used without permission from the copyright holder for activities such as nonprofit research, teaching, news reporting, or private study.
If you incorrectly decide that something is a fair use or falls into an exception to copyright infringement, you could be held criminally and civilly liable and have to pay damages. We suggest you talk to a lawyer if you have questions regarding fair uses of copyrighted works.
These are the same teens who are having unprotected sex, smoking cigarettes, drinking alcohol, driving cars at unsafe speeds, and continuing to indulge in drugs. Maybe if we told them about the consequences of those behaviours, they'd stop doing them as well.
What about the wider subject of ethics? Pretty handy for MS to focus only on the area that is of interest to them while acting like complete bastards in other areas (offence to bastards unintended).
Engineering is the art of compromise.
Is that Microsoft probably wouldn't even have this monopoly (and the all of its attendant benefits) if it weren't for the ease w/ which their software can be pirated. I'd doubt that even half of the home users w/ aftermarket Windows installations actually paid for each copy of it.
I tried to register so that I could vote in polls. For my security question, I supplied "freedom" as the answer. Oddly enough, the site returns an error: "Answer contains Profanity!" Is this really just a bug? Note: This answer appears with all of the security questions...
Just like teens will stop using pot when told of possible jail time for toking. How could this possibly not work?
"Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket." -- Eric Hoffer
accepting monopolistic business practice gets extra credit! mymonopoly.com owned by Microsoft coming soon! *(with "Jail" removed from the game)
"Don't let fools fool you. They are the clever ones."
Hmm... I see. Be sure to read the sections about what you can't do with their stuff...
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
It seems interesting that Microsoft has no place people can post their opinions about IP laws. But then again I suppose that if they did the site would have 20,000 threads labeling this site for what it really is.
And the answer is none. None more ironic.
Seriously i hope this plan backfires in some massively horrible way, like if somebody uploaded a copyrighted tune as a ringtone and teh MAFIAA pounces on M$'s ass. Oh my bad. I forgot they were in bed with each other. Oh well.
Yes the "War on Drugs" and the threat of "jail time" has made drugs almost non-existent amongst the youth!
...
So...
1. Educate youth with FUD
2.
3. Profit!
I have an idea. How about a fast OS you WANT to pay for?
Kids want to share with their friends what they deem cool. When I was a kid, we shared electronics, books, tapes (copies), records (copies) and knowledge.
The survey link results from the information week article is broken. The URL leads to:
We're sorry, but we were unable to service your request. You may wish to choose from the links below for information about Microsoft products and services.
So we don't even get to read the sampling/demographics on the kids they surveyed.
Nevertheless, Microsoft wants to correct teens' woeful ignorance. To do so, it has turned to Topics Education, a developer of custom curricula, to create a curriculum called "Intellectual Property Rights Education" for middle school and high school teachers. The Microsoft-sponsored curriculum consists of Web-based resources and case-study driven lesson plans that aim to engage students about intellectual property issues.
I will sue my local school district and Microsoft if they don't offer a counter curriculum called "Fair Use" and "Public domain". This course needs to teach kids about past copying abuses by Microsoft and how they used their Monopoly money to pay for the court sealed settlements that people are not allowed to read.
To support its teachings, Microsoft has launched MyBytes, a Web site where students can create custom ringtones, share content -- "their own content," as Microsoft makes clear -- and learn more about intellectual property rights.
To support my teachings to my kids on property rights, I've installed x/k/Ubuntu on all the computers in the house. They can create, share, sell, and distribute anything they what. They can even pass out Linux CDs to all their friends (they have). I teach my kids its OK to grab an MP3 off the main home server and play it on your MP3 player. Its not OK for them to give that MP3 away to their friends. I teach my kids the difference between ownership and free speech/ownership restrictive EULAs.
In August 2006, the site was shuttered and this explanation was subsequently posted: "Despite the significant progress we made on addressing the concerns raised about the original Captain Copyright initiative, as well as the positive feedback and requests for literally hundreds of lesson kits from teachers and librarians, we have come to the conclusion that the current climate around copyright issues will not allow a project like this one to be successful."
Here we go again, Microsofts favorite defender Captain Copyright. I forget what Captain Copyright said about Kerberos authentication. I also forget about what Captain Copyright did to the evil villains who were pillaging STAC. The DrDOS People counted on Captain Copyright but he didn't show up to defend them. What did Captain Copyright say again to the people who built their own computers without Windows? Oh Yeah, were thief's for not installing Windows.
If Microsoft would just worry about writing good programs for computers (Apple/Linux/ARM/Palm/Whatever) and stop trying to be the cyber police I might look at their products again (!Not. BSD/Linux is much faster and less maintenance). Until then Microsoft is still just a marketing company which happens to make an O/S for PCs.
My opinion (my animosity towards Microsoft does not equate to animosity for people who use Microsoft products),
Enjoy.
It's just the normal noises in here.
I have no problem with education. Even about copyright law. So lets educate the kids. Lets teach them what cut of the profits the artist actually gets. Lets teach them the very limits of absurdity that the existing laws can support. Show them that the current laws are unfair not only to the consumer but also to the artist. Oh yeah and gladly take MS' money to do it. Oh they want to CONTROL THE CONTENT. Not a chance. Find another patsy. But we'll take your money happily.
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
I would show more respect for shoes if you told me that you'd hack off my foot for not wearing them. What kind of joke is this? This isn't "education" this is a corporation trying to force schools to threaten their students for them.
As I understand it, and I am not an Attorney, it is NOT illegal to download illegally provided intellectual property. It *IS* illegal to offer it for down load. But again, I am not a legal professional.
That said, is it honest to take Intellectual Property (songs, tv shows, books, and other) that is copyrighted and not offered by the owner for free? It surely is NOT.
That Linux and other programs are offered by their owners, are valuable, and give value to the user are free, doesn't mean that we can ignore the wishes of the owners of Intellectual Property that do NOT choose to offer it without cost.
Even when IP is sent out over the airwaves without direct cost, as in television programs, it is not honest to download that IP until and unless the IP owner expressly gives permission to do so. Why? Because they did not consent, and they are the owner.
I NEVER download songs. I rip them, yes, because I have the legal right (despite RIIA's assertions to the contrary) to do so. (Again, that is a personal opinion, not a legal opinion.)
My rule of thumb is that if I don't have the CD for the music, I pretty much have no right to it other than listen over the radio/TV. Once I have a copy of the CD, I can pretty much move it around to suit my needs. (The home recording act).
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
Have you noticed what clicking on any of the labels (As in , for those of you that know what that means) does? No matter which one you click on, it selects "Zero" as the option. You have to click on the radio button directly to get the desired option.
Those who know HTML will instantly recognise this as a deliberate hack to capitalise on accidental "Zero" votes.
Summary: http://www.ipreducation.com/ipr_curriculum_overview.pdf Lesson One: http://www.ipreducation.com/pdfdownload.php?pdf=IntellWhat_final.pdf&email=RIAA@sucks.tv Lesson Two: http://www.ipreducation.com/pdfdownload.php?pdf=RuleofLaw_final.pdf&email=RIAA@sucks.tv Lesson Three: http://www.ipreducation.com/pdfdownload.php?pdf=Music_final.pdf&email=RIAA@sucks.tv Lesson Four: http://www.ipreducation.com/pdfdownload.php?pdf=ProtectRespect_final.pdf&email=RIAA@sucks.tv On another note: Does anybody else find that ipreduacation parses as IP Reeducation, rather than IPR Education? More seriously, though. Let's go over this one with a fine toothed comb, work it up, and bury it along with Captain Copyright.
I think they've heard about me.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=-Xfqkdh5Js4
Can I hire the Microsoft Coolness Brigade to plan my next birthday party? There'll be vegetables, stern lectures, and trips to the dentist. Oooh, can't wait!
You knew they wouldn't be starting a business ethics curriculum!
Seems like by the time I have kids, the "public education system" will actually just mean brainwashing. Guess there's always home school, but damn, what I woudln't give to see "critical thinking" put on the agenda for everyone ..
as long as they teach the kids under which conditions copying intellectual property is illegal. A responsible class should point out that it is not illegal to copy or download certain pieces of software, and teach kids where to find software from the Internet without being in violation of license.
However, as we all probably know, Microsoft doesn't intend to anything of the sort. Their only purpose with this campaign is to scare kids into buying Microsoft product, not get a real education on intellectual property, copyright and licenses.
How ridiculous for a corporation to educate. Won't be long before M$$$$$$ teaches that it's illegal to use anything but WinBlows (tm)...Outrageous
"The Brady Bunch is back...working homicide"
I am thinking when Microsoft teaches you something it is more of a brain washing than a lesson. I would be very shocked if the words "Fair Use" are even mentioned in the "lessons" If kids need education about copyright I suggest they visit http://www.eff.org/ , this is the website for the Electronic Frontier Foundation. They are fairly unbiased and have a slant toward fair use and away from things like DRM. Microsoft's view on IP is grossly slanted away from fair use and toward DRM. Anyone that lets their kid get an IP lesson from Microsoft must be sick in the head. Remember that we must build upon past knowledge to move forward, the 90 Year copyright and reduced fair use is retarding our progress and giving a huge advantage to China. Its time to put Mickey Mouse into the public domain and start supporting fair use before we end up with tape over our mouth.
Personsally- if I was stuck on a desert island, I'd be wanting a powerless water filter...
Most islands don't come with a handy 110V/220V power supply...
Well, I suppose you could alway use them for an anchor for you hand made raft...
Sara
Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
When was the last time MShit respected a law?
you had me at #!
How ridiculous to teach that copy is wrong but then have the gall to sucker kids out of their creations for corporate gain. Of course the microsoft terms for mybytes is similar to hotmail and others.
I had a quick look at the MyBytes site.
From the site:
"How many times should you be allowed to burn a copy of a CD that you purchased?
-Zero -One or two -Three to seven -As many as I like; I own it."
99% answered: "As many as I like; I own it."
In the poll no distribution (casual or otherwise) is implied and the user has purchased the product. Not particularly thought provoking. Should we expect an article follow up relating to this question, dealing with the semantics of copy control and how the lack of copy controls will make the RIAA cry?
The poll questions posted seem more of a data mining exercise for Microsoft than a learning tool. After reviewing a few "viewpoints" and "interviews", I think I would rather have another entity teaching IP to children than Microsoft.
Now it's teens, later it gonna be children. The younger the human, the more bullshit you can tell him that he gonna believe. It's just like religion, you take a child, teach them that there is god and some guys which tell you what the god wants from you and if he won't do what they say, you gonna fry in hell for eternity.
So, if they're are really so worried about law understanding, why won't they teach something that will really benefit all. Why? Because they don't care about people. They only care about the money then can get out of them. I think that they want it get to such point that when you even think about 'illegal' download, they gonna sentence you for life imprisonment. And the worst thing is, that they also want to control all the aspects of your digital life so they know when it gonna happen.
If it's going advance this way, I'm starting to get really worried about freedom of the internet.
My Windows is NOT slow, it's special!
Copyright system in case of books :
Where
B = book_publisher
A = book_author
C = book_customer
Transaction 1 : Book_publisher "B" buys the book "copyright"(right to make copy and sell the book) from "A" book_author by paying "royalty" for each copy of the book sold.
Transaction 2 : Book_publisher sells one book to a book_customer "C" who does not get "copyright"
So the primary condition for book_publisher acquiring "copyright" is payment of "royalty" to author of the copyrighted "stuff".
Copyright system in case of software :
Where
B = software_publisher
A = software_author
C = software_customer
Transaction laws that apply to software development is "work for hire". The work for hire laws are framed to enable companies to hire employees to write software for their internal use only.
Transaction 1 : Software_publisher "B" hires software authors "A" on work for hire.
Transaction 2 : Software publisher "B" sells the software to "C" the software_customer.
Primary condition for "copyright" is "royalty" payments on per copy sold to the "author"
In the absence of "royalty" payments to software authors on per copy sold, "Software publishers are the Pirates"!
Interesting that the article itself mentions the "Captain Copyright" propaganda campaign:
Access Copyright, a Canadian copyright enforcement group, in 2006 launched a "Captain Copyright" Web site and backed a lesson plan to teach students respect for copyright law. The project was greeted with widespread ridicule online and accusations that the site itself was violating copyright law.In August 2006, the site was shuttered and this explanation was subsequently posted: "Despite the significant progress we made on addressing the concerns raised about the original Captain Copyright initiative, as well as the positive feedback and requests for literally hundreds of lesson kits from teachers and librarians, we have come to the conclusion that the current climate around copyright issues will not allow a project like this one to be successful."
And this time it's somehow going to turn out different?
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
One of the terms is:
> You may not modify, copy, distribute, transmit, display, perform, reproduce, publish, license, create derivative works
> from, transfer, or sell any information, software, products or services obtained from the Services.
so the kids seem to be violating the site's terms of use if they share their ringtones (as the summary seems to say they are encouraged to do). Or at least if they share their ringtones outside of the site itself.
OTOH, I was surprised to see that the TOS explicitly mentions and links Creative Commons! This is at the end, though; I suppose they're relying on most kids who do bother to look at the TOS losing interest long before getting there. Or maybe MS is just not as paranoid as **AA, since for MS, the open-source cat has been out of the bag for a long, long time.
(IANAL)
There may be some small party in your country you (mostly) agree with. If I was a US citizen, it would be the libertarians for me.
By all means vote for that party, even if they have no serious chance of winning the election.
First, it tells the other parties that there is support for the positions of $SmallParty, and they may adopt some of those positions in order to win voters over.
+++ Recent history lesson +++
I'm currently observing such an effect with the "Linkspartei" in Germany, which consists of communists and socialists. Lots of their members and voters are former supporters of the SPD ("social democratic party of Germany"), which is traditionally a moderately left party that supports the "worker class" but is willing to work in a capitalist environment.
Several years ago, the SPD under Chancellor Schröder took a much more industry-friendly stance, alienating the left party wing in the process. Said left wing broke off under Oscar Lafontaine and subsequently united with the remnants of the old east Germany communists, forming the "Linkspartei".
By now the "Linkspartei" has gained enough popularity to get maybe 10% of the votes in an election, mostly at the expense of the SPD. The result is that the SPD is now moving left again, trying to regain some of those votes.
+++ end of history lesson +++
Second, if $SmallParty manages to gain a respectable third rank in the election, voting for them will no longer look like a total waste of one's vote. After all, they might win the next election with some more support. That may gain a few more votes from people who did already agree with them, but preferred to vote for a "lesser evil" that had actually a chance of winning.
C - the footgun of programming languages
Maybe they should teach their own executive about laws (and morality).
They consistently break the law with their illegal activities and just pay off anyone who tries to hold them to task on their behaviour.
Anyone who lets these bastards get anywhere near students is at the least morally corrupt.
The phrasing should be, "Artists should be able to attempt to sell their work". Bad songs sell quite well if marketed by a genius. Ask William Hung.
The theme goes, "it's not fair to artists for people to take it into their own hands to undercut artists' attempts to sell their music".
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
Because you decided to be hired by another company, it gets to use the results of your efforts. You are paid for your time.
If you thought you were good enough to do it all, you'd be the ceo of your own business where you can try to get paid for what you can sell instead of by the week.
Commercial artists also work per week and don't get to enjoy copyrights on their efforts. It's the tradeoff between steady quarters and speculative dollars.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
No one has ever wanted to pay for anything. We can choose to be willing to pay for something out of respect for the time and effort put into creation of something or we can choose to be willing to pay for something that is scarce, but a simple look at supply and demand will show that no one will ever want to pay for an OS. The marginal cost of producing software is effectively 0. The gain from being to use a computer is treated as an impossible to reproduce otherwise gain to productivity. Effectively, if MS were to charge $arbitrary large amount of money per person on earth for windows, it would be a good deal. Reality, of course, is that our society tends to overvalue money rather than goods and services. We want to get the best value for our dollar rather than a better product (which, as time goes to infinity, creates a better value, regardless of cost [for the inevetiable disagreement on this point, keep in mind that we are comparing 2 products that already exist]). For now (and probably until time t=infinity), people will be happy getting an OS that is good enough, rather than fast, at a price that approaches too much money, but doesn't quite break that barrier, or they will do drugs until stealing property seems like a good risk vs the possibility of jail time. I expect that most of us will see a usable OS that we are willing to go to jail for before we see a fast OS we are willing to pay for.
I mean sure everyone wants FREE stuff but I would say the majority of people do not mind paying for things that work.
then they most likely will copy and paste the copyrighted material and give it as study material. This will be a whole new level of irony.
When I look at how many copies students have and thus should need to do jailtime, I am becoming a warden, as that will be the mist wanted job in the world. Copyright does not stop at software. It also includes almost any study material.
I am not sure how much is copied in other countries, but when I look at what people have in copied books, I would guess it is some 80% or more. That is next to the many books they have bought.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
I could not help but notice that your bullet points were all: "I do this" and "I do that." Well, good for you, but is it realistic to assume that everybody will behave in the same manner?
That is not education, it is brainwashing.
Kids should be taught to be caring and to share.
Not to corrupt the minds of kids with "imaginary property" and shit like that.
And then release them under the GPL.
I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
How about things like balancing a checkbook, coming up with a household budget, figuring out how long it's going to take to pay off $10,000 credit card at 29% interest, why they shouldn't take out a private student loan for $45,000 if they're planning to be, say, a social worker, how much they will have for retirement if they start putting in $50 a month instead of wasting it at the bar or eating out.
Those, common sense scenarios seem to be totally missing in any form of education these days. We kick them out to the wolves and wonder why 5 years later they need to file for bankruptcy.
If you've never been modded as "flamebait" or "troll," you've never tried to argue a minority viewpoint here!
I don't even have to RTFA to know that all the work those kids put into developing their own custom ring tones will be owned by MS.
That is a GREAT way to educate kids on intellectual property rights.
eg. they have none.
I'd be fine with the course, the site, teaching kids, in fact, it'd be great if the FSF held courses and pages for kids to teach them the benefits of sharing media and software as well and the importance of creative commons, gpl, lgpl, bsd, apache, and mozilla licenses.
I work in a science lab at a major university as an all purpose tech/IT. I am frequently asked to steal software for my researchers. I have told many of them repeatedly that I will not steal software for them nor knowingly maintain that stolen software if they choose to do so themselves. This often incites confrontational behavior, name calling, etc. These are highly educated individuals and if the conversation lasts long enough it is clear that they not only think it is morally ok, but that it is not even theft.
I am not a pristinely innocent citizen, however I'm not about to risk my career and that of my lab so a researcher that just spent 3k on a conference and 2.5k on a new laptop (when their old was sufficient to get the job done) can save 50 dollars on some license that is essential for their work. When I attended college, I truly did so on a shoe string budget. Most of the software I used was open source. It wasn't always as good as the commercial alternatives, but it was "good enough" to warrant the savings.
The sense of entitlement is quite appalling. People do need to realize that software takes significant labor to produce, that it does belong to someone, and that the owner has the right to decide how that property is distributed. If some software is truly *essential* to what you do and nothing else can match that need, then this is only an indication of just how original, insightful, and valuable that software actually is. So either pay for it, write your own, or learn how to steal it yourself (and so bear the sole brunt of any consequences of that theft however slight the chance it may occur). Of course, the fourth option is to pay me to write it for you out of your grant. The fact that they don't consider this option shows that deep down they do realize just how costly it would be to develop such a solution.
Copyright or lack thereof does not affect artists ability to attempt to sell their work. In fact, without copyright we would probably see a lot more live music, as the artist is then charging for something that is impossible to reproduce cheaply -- the experience of seeing them perform live in person. We don't need copyright to ensure artists make music. I can't really comment on the quality or quantity of music produced mainly to encourage people to see the show, but I think it's a lot more understandable and doesn't need any legal strangeness like the whole mess of different "IP" laws to enforce it.
Languages aren't inherently fast -- implementations are efficient
As long as Microsoft spends the same amount of time & money educating the kids about:
1) The GPL
2) The number of times Microsoft infringed other people's copyright and the consequences of THAT.
Otherwise I'll call this what it is: Excrementum Bovinus.