RSS
Twitter
Want To Teach Technology? Gotta First Teach One-Sided Copyright Lessons
from the yeah,-like-that-will-help dept
In the past, schools have allowed obviously biased parties like the MPAA go into schools and teach one-sided lessons about intellectual property. However, now it appears that schools in California may be required to give one-sided intellectual property lessons if they want state money to teach technology. That's the gist of a new law being proposed that would tie state grant money (earmarked for teaching technology) to promises to teach very specific lessons on intellectual property. The specific language says three things need to be taught to get the money: "ethical behavior in regards to the use of information technology," "the concept, purpose, and significance of a copyright," and "the implications of illegal peer-to-peer network file sharing." Unfortunately, it's likely that all three discussions won't be balanced, but very one-sided in favor of the content industry. You could (and probably should!) have very interesting discussions around all of these points that point to the very big questions they raise -- but that doesn't seem to be the purpose of this bill. Still, it might be interesting if someone at a more progressive thinking school did get the grant money and used it towards a real examination of these three issues, rather than the simplistic, one-sided view of the entertainment industry.
Reader Comments
(Flattened / Threaded)
be careful of what you ask for....
if the criteria shown here are actual quotes from the bill (look,it's not like I'm required to actually RTFA), and the school isn't required to use pre-made, canned course content, I think it would be pretty easy to come up with something that meets the law but gives them (**AA) something they did not want.
A conversation of ethics? Why we've got some excellent examples of Recording/Motion Picture behaviour that should be avoided.
The purpose of copyright? Sure, let's go back to the original historical context, complete with limited duration of copyright protection
and then get back to un-ethical behaviour that has distorted copyright nearly beyond recognition.
Need I go on?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
No Subject Given
From the sarcastic side of things...
One of the lease published implications is the wider audience an artist is allowed to reach through the distribution of his or her material to areas that physical media could not reasonably reach. This would lead to increased sales and increased profitability for the artist.
Unfortunately, the (RI|MP)AA have made it so that sharing media of ANY kind, including that which you create yourself, is against the law punishable by life imprisonment, so don't do it.
Sharing is bad....mmmmmkay? (I hope the South Park people don't sue me...lol)
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: No Subject Given
Typo, sorry: lease should be least.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: No Subject Given
thanks Mike. on point.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
One-sided teaching will waste Ca's precious Ed. $$
Kids know when they're being fed a one-sided story,a nd they pay no mind. So a one-sided story won't change anything much.
- Precision Blogger
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Add Your Comment