I sent JA an e-mail, discussing my concerns about this program. I was in JA when I was a kid, and that I would bring up these concerns to my kids school, if they were not addressed, here is the response I got:
Mr. XXXXXX,
Thank you for writing. Please know there are a number of factual
inaccuracies contained in the AP story.
JA is attempting to educate students about all the issues surrounding
ILLEGAL file sharing, not file sharing. The reporter's editor, based in San
Francisco, agreed last night to make a number of corrections and repost the
story to the wire, though the original, incorrect story (the one you most
likely read) was already released.
There have been a number of corporate scandals over the last few years. We
believe the best way to stem that in the future is to carefully teach
children about business ethics. As guests in the classroom, we are VERY
sensitive to what our volunteers say in front of students; be assured all of
our curriculum reflects that sensitivity.
In this particular case, the more children get talking (and debating)
illegal file-sharing, the more awareness they will have about this issue.
That's how learning occurs, and that's what we hope happens. In fact, one of
the role-playing activities from our new Digital Citizenship program has
students playing the role of a computer user, who advocates that there is
"nothing wrong with illegal file sharing." Students are immediately engaged
by the relevancy of this subject matter, and we get them talking about the
facts, not necessarily an industry viewpoint. While this activity was
witnessed by the reporter in a classroom setting, it was not included in the
story.
Fair use is, in fact, discussed. Unfortunately this too was left out of the
article.
We invite you to access the curriculum, in its entirety, at
http://www.ja.org/programs/programs_supplements_ci tizenship.shtml
Please note too this program is optional; teachers who don't want it in
their classroom won't get it. Contrary to what the article portrays, the
actual feedback from educators indicates that this is an important message
to teach our children, as long as it is done responsibly and objectively.
Please feel free to contact or have any one else concerned about this issue
contact me. I am more than happy to set the record straight. In the
meantime, I have attached our rebuttal to the story. I urge you to please
give it your careful consideration.
Sincerely,
Edwin Bodensiek
Director - Public Affairs
Junior Achievement Inc.
One Education Way
Colorado Springs, CO 80906
719-540-6297
ebodensiek@ja.org
www.ja.org
What exactly is wrong with enforcing legitimate copyright enfringment cases? It's not like these cases have been seeking damages in the millions, like other companys, that don't actually own the IP.
If we want to talk constitutionality of something, where in the constitution does it state, that corporations have the right to infringe on my right not to be harrased. The list is voluntary, you are not required to register your number, and your not put on the list by default. This is no different then putting a No Soliceters sign on the door to your home. You have the right to tell people to leave you alone in advanced. This just takes away any excuses from telemarketers that they were never told, not to contact you.
Why didn't they just stick with all Macs? I mean we are talking about non-techies, that are going to be using them, and the Mac is one of the easiest systems to use for a newbie. Not to mention stable. Also why did it take them so long? I've setup simular set-ups (everytime I move) in under a day.
Then tell me why, here in washington state, a kid just won 60,000+ dollars for his public school doing the exact same thing? The judge found for the student, that the school did infringe on his freedom of speach, I could maybe see where they could do it, if he did it on school time. But just because a school has some policy, doesn't mean the constitution doesn't apply, when it's not on school time.
Slashdot Mirror
I sent JA an e-mail, discussing my concerns about this program. I was in JA when I was a kid, and that I would bring up these concerns to my kids school, if they were not addressed, here is the response I got: Mr. XXXXXX, Thank you for writing. Please know there are a number of factual inaccuracies contained in the AP story. JA is attempting to educate students about all the issues surrounding ILLEGAL file sharing, not file sharing. The reporter's editor, based in San Francisco, agreed last night to make a number of corrections and repost the story to the wire, though the original, incorrect story (the one you most likely read) was already released. There have been a number of corporate scandals over the last few years. We believe the best way to stem that in the future is to carefully teach children about business ethics. As guests in the classroom, we are VERY sensitive to what our volunteers say in front of students; be assured all of our curriculum reflects that sensitivity. In this particular case, the more children get talking (and debating) illegal file-sharing, the more awareness they will have about this issue. That's how learning occurs, and that's what we hope happens. In fact, one of the role-playing activities from our new Digital Citizenship program has students playing the role of a computer user, who advocates that there is "nothing wrong with illegal file sharing." Students are immediately engaged by the relevancy of this subject matter, and we get them talking about the facts, not necessarily an industry viewpoint. While this activity was witnessed by the reporter in a classroom setting, it was not included in the story. Fair use is, in fact, discussed. Unfortunately this too was left out of the article. We invite you to access the curriculum, in its entirety, at http://www.ja.org/programs/programs_supplements_ci tizenship.shtml
Please note too this program is optional; teachers who don't want it in
their classroom won't get it. Contrary to what the article portrays, the
actual feedback from educators indicates that this is an important message
to teach our children, as long as it is done responsibly and objectively.
Please feel free to contact or have any one else concerned about this issue
contact me. I am more than happy to set the record straight. In the
meantime, I have attached our rebuttal to the story. I urge you to please
give it your careful consideration.
Sincerely,
Edwin Bodensiek
Director - Public Affairs
Junior Achievement Inc.
One Education Way
Colorado Springs, CO 80906
719-540-6297
ebodensiek@ja.org
www.ja.org
What exactly is wrong with enforcing legitimate copyright enfringment cases? It's not like these cases have been seeking damages in the millions, like other companys, that don't actually own the IP.
If we want to talk constitutionality of something, where in the constitution does it state, that corporations have the right to infringe on my right not to be harrased. The list is voluntary, you are not required to register your number, and your not put on the list by default. This is no different then putting a No Soliceters sign on the door to your home. You have the right to tell people to leave you alone in advanced. This just takes away any excuses from telemarketers that they were never told, not to contact you.
Why didn't they just stick with all Macs? I mean we are talking about non-techies, that are going to be using them, and the Mac is one of the easiest systems to use for a newbie. Not to mention stable. Also why did it take them so long? I've setup simular set-ups (everytime I move) in under a day.
Then tell me why, here in washington state, a kid just won 60,000+ dollars for his public school doing the exact same thing? The judge found for the student, that the school did infringe on his freedom of speach, I could maybe see where they could do it, if he did it on school time. But just because a school has some policy, doesn't mean the constitution doesn't apply, when it's not on school time.