p2pnet - rss feed: Entertainent cartels vs US Students
p2pnet.net News:- The entertainment cartels have wheeled out yet another spurious ‘report’ custom-designed to “prove” most universities are hot-beds of illegality and most students are criminal p2p file sharers bent on ruining the profitability of the hard-pressed music and movie industries, simultaneously causing extreme distress to industry workers and contracted artists.
Backed by the AAU (Association of American Universities), Organized Music’s RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) and Hollywood’s MPAA (Motion Picture Association of America) regaled the US House Subcommittee on 21st Century Competitiveness with a corporate propaganda piece meant to encourage it to endorse further entirely self-serving entertainment cartel incursions into the US education system.
Subcommittee chairman Ric Keller not only acted as a cartel demo clerk, he also asked leading questions and stressed how US taxpayers would help pay the Big Four record labels (only one of which, Warner Music, is actually American) and the Hollywood movie studio cartel, which admittedly includes a higher proportion of US companies than Big Music, to continue their efforts to sue American students into becoming compliant consumers.
Or as InsideHigher Ed puts it, “Colleges have shown a wide-ranging level of interest and success in stopping illegal file sharing on their campuses, a panel of higher education experts and entertainment industry executives told a U.S. House of Representatives subcommittee on Tuesday.”
Apparently, “Some institutions have clear policies on what constitutes piracy,” says the story. But some don’t and even worse, “Some college presidents are receptive to the entertainment industry’s call for preventive action, and some aren’t.”
According to chief MPAA reality realignment specialist Dan Glickman, the US film industry lost $6.1 billion to piracy in 2005, and “nearly half of the industry’s domestic losses can be attributed to college students,” says the InsideHigher Ed story, failing to say why it reports unqualified industry statements as fact.
What to do, what to do?
Well, in April, “groups representing the recording and music industries sent 40 universities letters demanding that they do more to stop students from illegally copying music and videos,” says the story.
They also produced Campus Downloading, an appalling RIAA video travesty which EDUCAUSE vp Mark Luker touted to US college presidents across America, and which featured Graham Spanier, president of Pennsylvania State University, the first major American learning institution to become an entertainment industry sales and marketing division.
The Big Four’s RIAA oiled the disinterred Napster into Penn State so its owners could market product to students. With staff, funded by taxpayers and parent fees, acting as both sales teams and industry enforcers, the idea was, and still is, ‘Buy our product [as the Big Four call their music releases] and we won’t sue you.”
To keep things moving, the music and movie industries created something they call the Joint Commission of the Higher Education and Enforcement Communities Task Force.
Spanier is the current co-chair with RIAA president Cary Sherman as the other chairman. As far as we know, Barry Robinson, RIAA senior counsel for corporate affairs, is still both a Task Force staff member and a Penn State trustee. And Luker is also on the ‘committee’.
Meanwhile, “At the University System of Maryland, each college has a policy covering the use of network resources, said William E. Kirwan, the system’s chancellor,” according to the InsideHigher Ed item. “Maryland’s Board of Requests established a technology literacy requirement for students, and academic programs include discussions of the ethical impacts of file chairing.”
Coincidentally, Kirwan is destined to be the next Joint Commission of the Higher Education and Enforcement Communities Task Force chairman.
Below is the full text of the entertainment industry presentation, hosted online by the Association of American Universities.
Hearing on the Internet and the College Campus: How the Entertainment Industry and Higher Education are Working to Combat Illegal Piracy as presented to the Committee on Education and the Workforce Subcommittee on 21st Century Competitiveness on September 26, 2006
Primary Witnesses:
Dr William Kirwan (Chancellor, University System of Maryland)
Dan Glickman (Chairman and CEO, Motion Picture Association of America)
Cary Sherman (President, Recording Industry Association of America)
Cheryl Elsey (Illinois State University Librarian)
Dr William Fisher (Harvard Law Professor, and Director, Berkman Center for Internet and Society)
Members of Congress Present:
Re. Ric Keller (R-FL), Chairman of the Subcommittee
Rep Dale Kildee (D-MI), Ranking Minority Member
Rep Howard McKeon (R-CA), Chairman of the Full Committee
Rep Robert Scott (D-VA)
Rep Chris Van Hollen (D-MD)
Rep Susan Davis (D-CA)
Opening Statements:
Chairman Keller said that campus-based illegal filesharing of movies costs the film industry $500 million a year, which also cuts tax revenues for the government. He demonstrated how easy it is to download material illegally by downloading a song on LimeWire, a popular file sharing software. He added that the House-passed reauthorization of the Higher Education Act (H.R. 609) would allow universities to use federal funding to combat illegal filesharing on campuses.
Brit Kirwan said he has worked with various associations (including AAU) on the issue of illegal filesharing. He wants students to have �respect for the sanctity of intellectual property.� Although colleges and universities should combat illegal filesharing for practical reasons�such as its attraction of spam and viruses and increased support costs for institutions�a cheap, legal downloading alternative is needed. He noted that the legitimate use of peer-to-peer filesharing is increasing and that the University of Maryland now provides several legal alternatives to unauthorized file sharing.
Dan Glickman, CEO of the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), said that piracy cost the motion picture industry $6.1 billion dollars worldwide in 2005, with more than 50 percent of domestic losses ($500 million, as cited by the chairman) caused by college students. He said that universities had the solutions and best practices they needed to deal with the problem, including new technology, legitimate downloading services, education, and enforcement. He called on Congress to require regular reporting from universities on what they are doing to combat illegal file sharing.
Cheryl Elsey, Librarian of Illinois State University, said that lawsuits against several students at her campus for illegal filesharing and the cost of managing complaints from the film and recording industries prompted had prompted campus officials to ask the recording and motion picture associations for advice on how to deal with these problems. She described a six-point campus plan to help change students� behavior and culture.
William Fisher, Director of the Berkman Center for Internet and Society, acknowledged that illegal filesharing has created a crisis within the film and recording industries. But there are many authorized uses of peer-to-peer filesharing and that care should be taken not to restrict these uses. He warned there were many adverse side effects from trying to solve the problem solely with technology and said that legal alternatives are the most promising approach.
Full Committee Chairman McKeon noted that while stealing from a store is widely perceived to be illegal, illegal downloading is not. He stressed the need for greater education early on about the issue. He hoped that progress could be made through voluntary efforts, without federal legislation, since such legislation would likely carry unintended consequences.
Among the points made in the question period that followed the testimony were the following:
Rep. Kildee read Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution which protects intellectual property and makes the theft of such property a crime. He asked, �Is there a need to provide proactive alternatives to illegal, peer-to-peer filesharing?� Dr. Fisher said that suppression is not a long-term solution and that students have been reluctant to use legal services. He suggested making legal programs available automatically by charging a student fee.
Chairman Keller asked, �What kind of impact does illegal file sharing have on those who earn a living in the less glamorous roles of the motion picture industry?� Mr. Glickman replied that those who work behind the scenes constitute 95 percent of workers in the film industry and said they suffer as a result of illegal filesharing. The Institute for Policy Innovations will soon issue a study showing the economic impact that piracy will continue to have on the bulk of the film and television industry.
Chairman Keller asked if university associations and the film and music industries have been discussing various programs and enforcement policies for dealing with the issue of illegal filesharing. Mr. Glickman said that the groups have held discussions and that some universities have been cooperative while others have not been.
Rep. Van Hollen asked about the role of the joint committee, where the process is going, and if the committee is a vehicle for real change. Dr. Kirwan said the joint committee is an excellent vehicle for change. He noted that change does not always happen as quickly as some would like. But there has been growing awareness among universities about the problem of unauthorized filesharing and the range of actions that can be effective in addressing it.
Benjamin Croner, Association of American Universities
September 26, 2006
But wicked students notwithstanding, the movie and music cartels still somehow manage to rake in eye-popping revenues, year after year.
Stay tuned, and get ready for the next university shill report, which should be out sometime soon.
(Thanks, Wendy)
Also See:
InsideHigher Ed - House Panel Tackles Piracy, September 27, 2006
do more - RIAA, MPAA, school threat letter, April 28, 2006
appalling RIAA video travesty - RIAA video debacle, August 24, 2006
sales and marketing division - Big Music university shill report, September 21, 2006
p2pnet newsfeeds for your site.
rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss
Mobile - http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
October 6th, 2006 at 5:14 pm
In Dr. Graham Spanier’s defense (the Penn State bureaucrat interviewed in the RIAA’s Campus Downloading), what Spanier actually discusses is the financial impact that the RIAA’s copyright enforcement demands have had on Penn State. Spanier makes no direct claim as to whether the RIAA is right to place financial burdens on Penn State over file sharing.
…..
Interesting how Keller prefaced the hearing by demonstrating an instance of file sharing that is both eminently fair use, and indisputably harmless to the cartels’ profit. Just one more logical leap, and he’d hop right out of his corporate pocket and into the reality of file sharing.
…..
Also interesting how the tone of the hearing is so buddy-buddy. I can just see these elected representatives of the people gladhanding with their former-politician-turned-deep-pockets-lobbyist pals. Heck, I can see some of these people cutting checks as they step down from the microphone. Just another election season campaign fundwank, by my estimation.
…..
One undisputed assumption that should have been questioned before launching into the college file sharing debate: That colleges and universities are somehow obligated to advance the interests of corporate America beyond what is required by law. Why?