![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
chimericallyFirst Berkeley, and now Stanford is cracking down on "illegal use of file-sharing technology." Sounds like they're leaving it up to the RIAA/MPAA to determine violations and to establish a definition of "legal" -- a bit dangerous, if you ask me, given how liberally they're flinging about takedown notices (and how difficult it is to challenge one). Also, both letters have the usual misuse of DMCA, implying that it applies to file-sharing generally rather than to just reverse-engineering or otherwise circumventing copy protection technologies (e.g. DeCSS). Also, there's no mention of fair use in either letter. Anyway, thought some of you might be interested in seeing both of these.
The Stanford letter:
The Berkeley letter:
The Stanford letter:
From: Vice Provost Greg Boardman <vpsa-announce@sumail.stanford.edu>
Date: May 15, 2007 7:31 PM
Subject: Illegal File-sharing
Dear Stanford student,
Illegal use of file-sharing technology continues to be a critical problem at Stanford. In spite of our efforts to advise students about the serious consequences that can result from illegal distribution of copyrighted materials there is clear evidence that this is a growing phenomenon that is not going away.
As a result, the university is announcing a change in the policy governing DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) complaints. The new policy involves an Internet reconnect fee and represents a significant change in actions the university will take in addressing violations.
For information on the new policy please see:
http://www.stanford.edu/dept/legal/recent/DMCAReconnectfee5-11-07.Web.pdf.
[SUMMARY OF PDF: $100 RECONNECT FEE FOR FIRST DMCA COMPLAINT, $500 FOR SECOND, $1000 FOR THIRD]
If you have questions about the DMCA Reconnect Fee policy, please contact
Lauren Schoenthaler (at: lks@stanford.edu), Senior University Counsel.
Regards,
Greg Boardman
Vice Provost for Student Affairs
The Berkeley letter:
From: POULLARD@berkeley.edu <poullard@berkeley.edu>
Date: Apr 3, 2007 3:42 PM
Subject: UCB NOTICE REGARDING ILLEGAL FILESHARING
Dear Student,
Under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), copying and sharing copyrighted materials without permission is illegal. As you may know, the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), and some other copyright owners and groups have recently stepped up their efforts to curb illegal filesharing on the Internet. This academic year, the University has received a much larger volume of complaints about peer-to-peer file sharing under the DMCA. In addition, the RIAA is sending "early settlement" letters to colleges around the country as part of their new anti-theft campaign announced in January (see press release at http://www.riaa.com/news/newsletter/032107.asp). This is an opportune time to remind you of relevant policies and practices at UC Berkeley.
DMCA "take-down" notices
Federal law requires that the University take action when it is notified that someone on its network is distributing copyrighted materials without permission. Whether you are aware of the violation or not, if UC Berkeley's DMCA agent receives a "takedown notice" alleging that your computer is distributing copyrighted material without permission, the University follows established policy enforcement procedures, see: http://www.rescomp.berkeley.edu/besmart/filesharing/ http://itpolicy.berkeley.edu/copyright/
Early Settlement Letters
The University of California has agreed to forward "early settlement" letters to students on the campus network that the RIAA alleges have shared copyrighted material illegally. The University will send a cover letter along with the RIAA early settlement letter to the student's email address, as well as his/her current and permanent addresses. Unless served with a proper subpoena, UC Berkeley will NOT release the name of the user to the content owner or RIAA upon receipt of a DMCA notice or early settlement letter.
By forwarding the early settlement letters, the University of California has made no determination that students have engaged in copyright infringement or that they should enter into an early settlement with the copyright holder. It is solely the student's personal decision whether to avail him or herself of the "early settlement" procedure.
Legal downloading
UC Berkeley supports and encourages the legal downloading of music, movies, and software. Residential and Student Service Programs provides extensive education for incoming students about the potential legal and policy enforcement consequences of illegal filesharing. To find out more about these campus programs, please visit http://rescomp.berkeley.edu/besmart/ and http://rts.berkeley.edu/legaldownloads/.
To comply with the law and to protect yourself from possible litigation, we strongly encourage you to remove illegally-obtained copyrighted material from your computer, and to stop downloading copyrighted material illegally if you do so now. We will continue our vigorous education efforts in this area, but ultimately the choice is yours. Please take advantage of the information on the websites listed in this letter.
Sincerely,
Jonathan Poullard
Dean of Students
Shelton Waggener
Associate Vice-Chancellor and
Chief Information Officer
***********************
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-05-16 06:15 am (UTC)I think the university loses DMCA safe harbor if they exercise editorial control on which DMCA takedown notices they execute.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-16 06:19 am (UTC)As for outrage or indignation at these letters, I like to step back and think financially about these notices. Both colleges still have to pay for their bandwidth (and if not the bandwidth outright, they are charged by the next hub on their giant networks for data transfer costs). It's in their interest to try to curtail activities that create a very noticeable increase in bandwidth use that comes along with sharing of large media files.
There are copywrite laws for good reasons, and artists / actors / special effects artists work hard for the money their artwork generates when purchased or licensed properly. Just because it's easy to convert a DVD to a .mov or .mpeg doesn't mean that what's being done isn't wrong.
I don't believe that the RIAA or MPAA are taking the correct approach by any means, but did the majority of people who are engaged in filesharing of copywrited works actually do anything to deserve that advance copy of Spiderman 3, or the latest Avril CD? My defense is that they still owe me for having to listen to Lars Ulrich tell me over and over that I was stealing and hurting his financial stability.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-16 06:33 am (UTC)I won't get into how little (if anything) most artists get for their work if they're going through one of the big labels, say -- that's not my point here. (And given the amount of pirated stuff you have, I'm surprised you're spouting their rhetoric ... ;~)) I'm just lamenting the loss of fair use (which copyright law is supposed to allow) and cringing at the misinterpretation of the DMCA.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-16 06:35 am (UTC)The porn collection though..... Wow.. I'd be in trouble.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-16 05:14 pm (UTC)Perhaps we could use these terms strategically and build ill-feeling toward the policies by filing notices with some legal justification but in cases where there is some debate. Marginal fair use cases might be one example.
But I'm truing and trying...
Date: 2007-05-26 09:22 pm (UTC)But I'm truing and trying...
Date: 2007-05-28 08:41 am (UTC)Marsians ready to atack! nobody help us to survive
Date: 2007-05-30 06:44 pm (UTC)Helpful links - pharmacy
Date: 2007-06-02 05:03 pm (UTC)New pharmacy and re4plicas
Date: 2007-06-04 01:27 pm (UTC)Some links for you - dont need? just delete
Date: 2007-06-05 07:43 pm (UTC)Very simple project
Date: 2007-06-05 07:48 pm (UTC)Some links for you - testing
Date: 2007-06-14 06:03 am (UTC)Paxil shmaxil and butalbital
Date: 2007-06-15 01:41 am (UTC)Diflucan, carisoprodol
Date: 2007-06-15 02:14 am (UTC)Paxil shmaxil and butalbital
Date: 2007-06-16 06:09 am (UTC)Diflucan, carisoprodol
Date: 2007-06-17 01:12 pm (UTC)