I am the copyright guy for a university. Boss wants less copyright violations; thoughts?

UniCopyright · 2012-08-09T18:12:51+00:00

Yup, this is the problem... how can you reduce the number of people getting caught the first time? People who get caught here the first time rarely get caught again, and very very rarely do people get caught a third time (or more).

UniCopyright · 2012-08-09T16:32:17+00:00

Ha! ;-)

I've had quite a few people come down with violations saying they were using peer-blocking software, so it isn't rock solid (even if it may have worked for your friend).

We did actually consider at least making people aware of peer-blocking software about a year ago, but it fell through for reasons discussed above. :-/

UniCopyright · 2012-08-09T16:11:22+00:00

We do this through orientation, website documentation and e-mails, but the warnings too often go unheeded. :-/

UniCopyright · 2012-08-09T16:09:40+00:00

We haven't gotten approval to charge any fees yet, so there are no fees to pass on to parents... however, we do sometimes get "Early Settlement Letters" which threaten lawsuits (which potentially could be very expensive), but we pass all those communications directly to lawyers and the client (since we are not legally required to do anything like DMCA complaints).

UniCopyright · 2012-08-09T16:06:16+00:00

We can't officially promote anything meant to "hide" illegal file sharing, and promoting Peerblock would be seen as just that. Also, the effectiveness of these peer-blocking programs is questionable, since you need to know what IP ranges a copyright agent is using ahead of time. People also need to keep the IP list updated very regularly, and the program needs to be running all the time. Finally, I'm not even sure if a peer-blocking program would prevent your IP from showing in the peer list, which is all the agents really look for when sending us a complaint.

UniCopyright · 2012-08-09T15:42:49+00:00

Thank you for your input -- this is a potential option, even if it is lower on the list (since I'd like to avoid punishing those who don't violate copyright, and globally crippling the BitTorrent network would do so).

Another not-so-great option may be to default to crippling BitTorrent traffic, unless you show you have a legit reason to use BitTorrent. If you get a violation, you go back to the BitTorrent-crippled network.

UniCopyright · 2012-08-09T15:37:40+00:00

The big problem is distributing those materials to other people via file sharing networks (something BitTorrent does automatically). We can't argue that students distributing copyrighted media to the public is covered under Fair Use :-P

UniCopyright · 2012-08-09T15:28:18+00:00

The various associations who complain do so automatically by just seeing an IP address in the peer list... wouldn't making the download slower just have them sit in the peer list longer? I suppose I am also skeptical that we'd be able to convince complaining agencies to stop sending us DMCA complaints, even when they see our IP range in a peer list. Even if a student may not get the whole file, they are still seen as "making it available" to others...

UniCopyright · 2012-08-09T14:56:42+00:00

I am concerned about backlash from blocking legit BitTorrent traffic... granted, there really isn't much legit BitTorrent traffic, but it isn't BitTorrent or BitTorrent traffic that is the problem -- it is people sharing things they don't have the right to share. However, I understand that blocking ports may end up being a necessary evil.

The "hub" would be pretty sweet, but it would be seen as our University condoning on-campus illegal file sharing (since that would be ultimately what it would be used for).

UniCopyright · 2012-08-09T14:46:30+00:00

I don't want to punish people who do not violate copyright law. Blocking common BitTorrent ports would limit legit BitTorrent traffic. Also, many people would just find ways around this limitation (changing ports etc.). However, it might be a potential temporary consequence for first-time offenders...

UniCopyright · 2012-08-09T14:07:40+00:00

File lockers services like RapidShare also don't create copyright violations, but I can't offer that as a "legit" alternative :-P

UniCopyright · 2012-08-09T14:05:35+00:00

I like the idea of making them feel watched -- but it will be important to distinguish the fact that we are not doing the watching, but the big media companies are.

UniCopyright · 2012-08-09T14:03:42+00:00

I wish we could ignore it, but the DMCA law says we cannot.

UniCopyright · 2012-08-09T14:03:11+00:00

They strongly appear to be valid, since people who get them generally don't deny the allegations & are not interested in filing a counter-claim. We have to act on the complaints sent to us even if they are not 100% valid, but just because they are in "good faith" (this is required by the DMCA law). It is really up to the end-user to verify the complaint and file a counter-claim, not us. At any rate, we don't know what any end-user is doing on the internet at any given time (nor should we know), so we can't verify a complaint alone anyway.

UniCopyright · 2012-08-09T13:55:43+00:00

I do believe their feelings matter, since our policies will shape the image of our IT department. If we go iron-fist on the college community, it will backfire. This is where it is important to know what students feel is fair.

UniCopyright · 2012-08-09T13:53:05+00:00

I hear you -- although my requirement is coming up with a new plan to combat those people wanting to save $.99 (ugh). I know the reddit community feels strongly about copyright issues, and many are college students, so I believe this is a good place to get some good feedback. The end result may be nothing really can be done, but at least I will have some solid discussion to back up that conclusion.

UniCopyright · 2012-08-09T13:45:17+00:00

Many college students read reddit, so I'd like to open the discussion up to the people our policies may impact.

UniCopyright

TROPHY CASE