Archive for Thursday, July 19, 2007
Downloading penalties stiffer
July 19, 2007
Advertisement
KU enforcing zero-tolerance for piracy
KU students in residence halls now face a zero-tolerance policy of they illegally downloaded music or movies. Enlarge video
The penalty for illegally downloading music or movies in Kansas University residence halls has become steeper.
Effective this fall, KU has instituted a zero-tolerance policy and will deactivate ResNet Network access for students in university housing if KU receives notice of a copyright violation and an appeal is denied. Students could still access computers on campus labs and use their KU e-mail addresses.
"It's serious business. Students need to take notice," KU spokesman Todd Cohen said. "That's why we are trying to educate them and their parents. It's not a matter of thinking that nothing will happen to you."
Under the previous policy, students were allowed three strikes. Typically, the university would make the user remove the material and watch a tutorial in addition to receive a warning. But KU has received an increasing number of complaints from businesses and organizations each year, such as 141 notices in 2005 and 345 in the past year, Cohen said.
"From day one, they're going to get the warning: 'Don't do it,' rather than waiting for that first or second strike," he said.
Information on KU's Internet use Web site, www.dmca.ku.edu, lists possible illegal file-sharing software as KaZaA, Gnutella, Morpheus or DC++.
KU leaders stressed the new policy the same day the Recording Industry Association of America announced it had sent 408 pre-litigation settlement letters to 23 universities, including KU.
RIAA represents large record companies, including EMI Recorded Music, Sony BMG Music Entertainment, Universal Music Group and Warner Music Group.
RIAA asks the universities, which are the Internet service providers, to forward the letters to the person with a corresponding Internet protocol address. RIAA offers to settle with students before filing a lawsuit, said RIAA spokeswoman Cara Duckworth.
She said RIAA has focused its attention on colleges as an "education and deterrence campaign" because the illegal downloading is "disproportionately high on college campuses." RIAA has sent about 2,400 of the letters since February 2003, and the most recent letters sent allege the illegal downloads occurred in the past six months.
According to a Journal-World story in 2004, a then-KU student settled with RIAA for about $3,000.
More like this
- Piracy net snares 2 from KU April 29, 2004
- KU awaiting subpoena for illegal music downloads 8 comments / October 17, 2007
- Students negotiating settlement for music downloads August 12, 2004
- Piracy bill targets college campuses 1 comment / November 18, 2007
- Music labels turn up fight against file sharing June 26, 2003
Top ads RSS
- Floor Tech/Floater Sun.-Thurs., 2-4 hrs. per night, start at 5:00 ...
- Coordinator with Teaching Responsibilities University of Kansas Requires professional knowledge ...
- ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT Fundraising and public relations firm seeking full-time administrative ...
- KU Center for Educational
- Lawrence Chamber of Commerce
Marketplace
Arts & Entertainment · Bars · Theatres · Restaurants · Coffeehouses · Libraries · Antiques · Services
- Blog: Palin Book Could Be Your Cheapest Source For Winter Fuel November 20, 2009 · 49 comments
- Blog: We Noticed November 19, 2009 · 111 comments
- Mangino denies validity of former player allegations November 19, 2009 · 157 comments
- Blog: Why Do People Repeat Falsehoods? November 20, 2009 · 43 comments
- Lawrence man charged in hit-and-run accident that killed bicyclist November 19, 2009 · 108 comments
- KU's Chancellor issues statement putting support behind Lew Perkins November 20, 2009 · 35 comments
- Blog: When You're Driving In Fog, You Need To Be Prepared November 20, 2009 · 8 comments
- Muslim countries seek blasphemy ban November 20, 2009 · 22 comments
- United Way about $800,000 short of $1.8 million campaign goal November 20, 2009 · 16 comments
- Poll: Should a "Botax" be imposed on vanity procedures such as breast implants, face lifts, tummy tucks and Botox injections? November 19, 2009 · 31 comments
- Lawrence schools preparing for another round of budget cuts November 18, 2009
- Resident hopes to start rickshaw business in downtown Lawrence, pending city approval November 19, 2009
- KU's Chancellor issues statement putting support behind Lew Perkins November 20, 2009
- Farmers' Turnpike reopens after four months of construction November 20, 2009
- KU student pushes button that demolishes a portion of the Kansas Turnpike bridge November 19, 2009
- Obesity activist crossing country to urge American Indians to embrace healthier diet November 20, 2009
- Kansas Board of Regents OKs contract to implement $25.6 million in conservation projects November 19, 2009
- Lawrence Arts Center names new executive director November 18, 2009
- Baldwin City teen detained for bringing loaded gun and knife to school November 19, 2009
- New, legal, drug has law enforcement concerned — and it's already on a Lawrence store's shelves November 4, 2009
19 July 2007
at 6:31 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Ragingbear (Anonymous) says…
RIAA are a bunch of semi-terroristic bullies. They have accused many people that don't even own computers or internet connections with illegal downloading. Even if you have downloaded music, fight them. They will have a heck of a time having any proof in court. After all, such tracing by a private industry to people's computers is illegal and inadmissible in court. But you will have to challenge that evidence on those grounds. Don't be fooled.
Also, wait till the music is at least a year or two old. New music is what is heavily protected.
19 July 2007
at 7:53 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
compmd (Anonymous) says…
Uploading is what will get you in trouble, not downloading, strictly speaking.
“That's why we are trying to educate them and their parents. It's not a matter of thinking that nothing will happen to you.”
That's correct. It will happen to you, even if you've done nothing wrong. The MPAA accused me of making available a movie that wasn't even available in the US in a language I didn't speak while I lived in the dorms. That was back in the day when the university still had a spine.
Its no surprise that while many other universities are standing up to the MAFIAA and telling them they can go screw themselves, KU goes spineless and spanks its students. Why does KU think that giving students a nightmare to live through (which they can't even prove they deserve) when those students should be dealing with classes? Let us view the KU Mission Statement:
http://www.ku.edu/about/institutional…
Show me the part that states that the university must pursue cases of copyright infringement because some company says so.
19 July 2007
at 8:17 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
gr (Anonymous) says…
“for students in university housing if KU receives notice of a copyright violation ”
Ok, could someone explain something to me. KU is supposed to receive notice if someone downloads something illegally. They download it from some source. Does that source inform KU they allowed someone to download something from their site? That really doesn't make sense to me.
“RIAA asks the universities, which are the Internet service providers, to forward the letters to the person with a corresponding Internet protocol address.”
Where do they get that address? From a site that permits illegal downloading? Wouldn't it be easier to stop that company from permitting illegal downloading? What am I missing?
19 July 2007
at 11:30 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Marion (Marion Lynn) says…
By logical extension it is illegal for one person to loan a printed book to another person as this would constitute copyright violation.
This can be shown in the fact that many eBooks can be read on only one computer after downloading and attempting to print or otherwise duplicate the book results in disabling of the file.
As with many downloadable software programs, some books available on disc can only be read on the computer to which the disc was irignally registered and attempting to read the disc on another obx disables the disc.
The entire copyright thing is getting dodgy!
19 July 2007
at 1:34 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
average (Anonymous) says…
compmd -
To correct you, we've had at least one student copped for copyright infringement who was just downloading (straight http, not torrent). Site he was downloading from was a honeypot. Entrapment, probably. But they just wanted to send a threatening letter, not prosecute.
Between ResNet (fees and arbitrary shutdowns), Parking (fees and arbitrary tows), and a hundred other insults, I don't think I could recommend student housing to any incoming student, despite three great years in the schol halls (years ago).
19 July 2007
at 5:55 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Marion (Marion Lynn) says…
Anybody with more than two brain cells avoids honey pots.
Of all kinds.
;)
19 July 2007
at 6:23 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
compmd (Anonymous) says…
average,
if the student was downloading a song that was otherwise available in stores in unencrypted format, and he purchased the CD, it is not copyright infringement to have a backup of the content of the CD; it is an exercise of fair use. Of course, we both know this likely isn't the case. Unfortunately what they did isn't entrapment since the MAFIAA isn't a government entity (yet), but it is possible that the student acted completely within the law if the owner of the honeypot was the copyright holder of the material made available for free. What is illegal about downloading that material then?
I'm pretty sure there is a special place in hell for all these RIAA and MPAA freaks.
19 July 2007
at 7:31 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
crazyks (Anonymous) says…
I read once where they attempted to prosecute an 85 year old woman, who didn't even have a computer, let alone an internet connection, didn't know what an mp3 was, and had no way of doing what they were accusing her of.
But they refused to admit they were wrong…don't know what happened to the woman, though.