Should Public Schools Do Copyright Dirty Work?
from the put-your-money-where-your-MP3-is dept
Having already gotten the government to to fall into line and then setting up its own private police force to make busts, it sounds like the entertainment industry's got a new friend in the copyright enforcement battle: California's public university system, which has struck a deal with a couple of companies to sell music and movie download services to its students. This type of deal isn't without precedent: Napster's got similar deals in place with a number of schools, most of which appear to be spectacular failures. But what's troubling is the comment by a UC system director, who said "We felt we should do something to encourage legal services." Why should public schools pay to subsidize these services when any student that's interested is free to subscribe to them on their own? And when did higher education take on the role of copyright enforcer? If the RIAA and MPAA are so convinced that giving students cheap legal alternatives will stop file-sharing, let them pay for it.
Add Your Comment