Curb Illegal Downloading on College Campuses Act of 2007

    The goal of this bill is to combat illegal downloading on university campuses.   In the ‘findings’ section of the bill, it states that illegal downloading of a variety of mediums are used and have been used increasingly on university and college campuses. It also claims that peer-to-peer file sharing puts a strain on the university and costs the university money. Congress also finds that illegal downloading puts the university networks at a higher risk of being infected with computer viruses. The last point made in congress’ findings is that programs that stop illegal downloading can do so without violating the privacy of students or their academics. The bill also amends the ‘Higher Education Act’ of 1965 by adding support for pilot programs and policies that reduce the amount of illegal downloading.

    This bill that was introduced in the House is valuable to my topic because it provides congress' standings on the relationship between universities and file sharing. The bill demonstrates that congress recognizes the downfalls of file sharing, not only from a legal standpoint but also from the effect it has on universities. Although the bill supports the fight against illegal downloading, it does not necessarily make universities responsible, nor does it directly support the RIAA.

 Copyright Silliness on Campus

    This Washington Post article discusses the intensity of the RIAA in their fight against illegal downloading of music and movies. The article explains how the Record Industry Association of America is questioning 19 major American Universities regarding their actions against students who download. One of the major questions being asked is whether or not these universities are expelling students who practice peer-to-peer file sharing and illegally download. The RIAA claims that certain universities are not expelling enough students for these causes. It seems that even with the RIAA attempting to control universities, they continue to sue and threaten individual students. The monitoring techniques the RIAA wants universities to utilize are not only costly, by also ineffective. Students will be able to outsmart the monitoring system either through the internet or simply with blank CDs and hard drives. Music and movies can be shared even with the RIAA’s “copyright hall monitor”. This article recommends a blanket license that would allow students access to music and movies from whatever source they choose. This blanket license would be similar to that used by universities for a cappella groups that perform on campus and cable television subscriptions. The article concludes claiming that universities have more important things to worry about than the RIAA’s fight for money.

    This article supports my thesis. It provides a variety of reasons why the RIAA is losing control over their copyright battle. Not only is the RIAA threatening students, but it is also attempting to discipline major American universities who do not follow suit in acting against their own students. The author offers another option of blanket fees as opposed to suing every student and threatening universities. This way of handling the file-sharing phenomenon supports my own argument for promoting awareness as opposed to financially attacking students.

 Music Industry Tightens Squeeze on Students; Campus Network Access Targeted

    This article provides information focusing on the RIAA’s new tactic in its “never-ending effort to crack down on pirated music”. Mainly, that the RIAA is reaching new levels in their attempts to end piracy by singling out universities as being either heavily trafficked schools or effective in preventing file-sharing among their students. Those with the most file-sharing are Ohio and Purdue, and the RIAA seems to believe that by pressuring these schools, the number of peer-to-peer sharing among students will decrease. On the other hand, UCLA is one school whose policies against illegal downloading is approved by the RIAA. UCLA has suspended students who repeatedly break the school’s policies, giving the RIAA strong support. At schools where students are active downloaders, those caught receive letters from the RIAA warning them about a possible lawsuit since they practiced illegal downloading. Although peer-to-peer file sharing continues, the article states that lawsuits have been an effective tool by basically scaring students out of file-sharing.

    On the one hand this article supports my argument because the author demonstrates the severity of the RIAA’s threats. However it also shows that lawsuits and the school’s involvement in these cases does make a difference, even if only by scaring the students. It also presents information describing how differently universities have responded to the file sharing. UCLA presents an interesting and very different response by suspending those students who are repeatedly caught participating in peer-to-peer file sharing. This information about UCLA's policies would be valuable as comparison for schools who are either against monitoring file sharing among students, or even those which seem to be doing the bare minimum.

RIAA v. U: The state of file-sharing on campus

       This article discusses the actions taken by Missouri’s University of Science and Technology. The University decided to make a quiz on the effects and legal issues of peer-to-peer file sharing pop up on a student's computer screen if they attempt to make an illegal download. This way, the students cannot claim ignorance if they are able to pass the quiz and remove the block on their downloading and are informed of the consequences of their actions. “Be Aware Your Uploading” or BAYU is given as another option for giving students the information they need to avoid ‘accidental downloading’.  It acknowledges the fact that not all students are technologically savvy and know exactly what they are doing on the internet. BAYU gives students a warning that they are downloading illegally before they complete the download.  The article also discusses the policies adopted by Stanford, Ohio University, University of Colorado-Boulder and the University of Minnesota. The article then states the positions of IT’s and Educause (the group that represents the IT’s) as having serious problems with both the RIAA and total blocking of peer-to-peer. Mainly because the IT’s, like most who work with students, care about the students' education and the internet's role in education has been greatly increasing. The next section of the article provides information regarding how much university students are actually involved in file sharing, and the likelihood that colleges are not actually facilitating this illegal behavior. It claims that the file sharing would start anew each year with the incoming freshman class because of high school experience with downloading.

    The article provides valuable information for my question of how universities are handling the RIAA’s increasing demands to impede file sharing. It presents the differing actions and policies implemented by universities, such as BAYU and the pop quizzes before downloading takes place. These different courses taken by the different universities could support my argument that it would be best for universities to provide information for students. The universities’ policies give examples and possible options for file sharing on campuses to be controlled without putting universities against their students.