 |
|
 |
|
|
|
 |
|
In the Comments
You have to learn to let go. The idea that books, magazines, databases or any form of information source can and should be kept for perpetuity is laughable. Items in a library need to be weeded and space is the major reason why. I know all of you want to keep your precious books, and I do to. But who’s going to pay for it, you?... — the other me
Library Protesters to Ohio State U.: Digital's OK, but Save Our Books!
Recent Posts
Advocates for the Blind Sue Arizona State U. Over Kindle Use | Comment [50]
A California Dream: Saving State Universities With an Online Campus | Comment [22]
Are Scholarly E-Mail Lists Fading in an Era of Blogs and Twitter? | Comment [7]
David Wiley: The Parable of the Inventor and the Trucker | Comment [21]
Introducing Guest Blogger David Wiley | Comment [1]
Submit to Wired Campus
Tell us about stories we should be covering, and what you don't like.
Wired Campus Writers
Internet issues, new technology, security, computing
Jennifer Howard
libraries, publishing
Sara Lipka
piracy, student technology use
Marc Parry
distance education, security, the technology marketplace
Jeffrey R. Young
video, audio, how technology is changing scholarship and teaching
Need more tech news?
Read our complete IT section.
Categories
July 2, 2009
Advocates for the Blind Sue Arizona State U. Over Kindle Use
The National Federation of the Blind and the American Council of the Blind are suing Arizona State University for its use of the Amazon Kindle to distribute electronic textbooks to students, saying the device cannot be used by blind students.
The groups say the Kindle has text-to-speech technology that reads books aloud to blind students, but that the device’s menus do not offer a way for blind students to purchase books, select a book to read, or even to activate the text-to-speech feature, according to a joint statement by the two groups.
In a lawsuit filed last week, a journalism student was also named as a plaintiff.
“While my peers will have instant access to their course materials in electronic form, I will still have to wait weeks or months for accessible texts to be prepared for me,” said the student, Darrell Shandrow, in the groups’ statement. “These texts will not provide the access and features available to other students.”
In a statement to the Library Journal, a university spokeswoman, Martha Dennis Christiansen, did not answer any specific questions pertaining to the lawsuit.
“Arizona State University is committed to equal access for all students. Disability Resource Centers are located on all ASU campuses. The centers enable students to establish eligibility and obtain services and accommodations for qualified students with disabilities,” she said. “These efforts are focused on providing the necessary tools so that all students with disabilities have an equal opportunity to be successful in their academic pursuits.”
The complaint asked the Office for Civil Rights of the U.S. Department of Education and the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice to investigate similar practices at Case Western Reserve University, Darden School of Business at the University of Virginia, Pace University, Princeton University, and Reed College. —Marc Beja
Posted on Thursday July 2, 2009 | Permalink | Comment [50]June 26, 2009
Computer With Personal Information of Cornell U. Students and Professors Is Stolen
A laptop containing the names and Social Security numbers of some 45,000 Cornell University students and faculty members has been stolen, The Cornell Daily Sun reports.
The computer was stolen earlier this month, when a university employee was correcting file-processing transmission errors and left the computer unattended.
In a press release, the university said it will offer a year’s worth of free credit reports, credit monitoring, and identity-theft protection to anyone affected.
On a separate Web page, the university said it would not provide any additional information on the theft, as local police are investigating the incident.
Aaron Lewis, a New York State police investigator, told The Sun that the theft appeared to be a “crime of opportunity,” not a concerted effort to steal sensitive information. He said the media attention devoted to the theft could inform the thief of the sensitive information contained on the laptop. “It’s obviously a Cornell computer and has a Cornell sticker,” he said. —Marc Beja
Posted on Friday June 26, 2009 | Permalink | Comment [13]June 24, 2009
Colleges Offer Online Help on Copyright Law for Instructors
As instructors prepare for the fall semester, colleges are trying to make sure their teachers aren’t breaking any copyright laws in their lectures.
The City University of New York’s Baruch College recently released an interactive guide to using multimedia in courses.
Baruch’s online guide begins with background information on copyrighted material, presented by a computer-animated middle-age man. Instructors can then click through the system’s “Copyright Metro,” which gives step-by-step verbal and written instructions on determining what materials can be used in courses legally. There are three “metro lines” that can be taken, depending on if the instructor plans to use the material in class or online, or if they have copyright-holder permission to use the material – which gets you a ride on the “express train” to the final stop, which says you can use the material.
Baruch is not alone in trying to prevent legal problems for itself or its professors. Among other institutions, Reed College has a traditional Web page that offers advice about using materials, with links to information from other college Web sites. The University of Maryland University College also has a site that has information for students and professors who want to legally use copyrighted material in classes and on the Internet. —Marc Beja
Posted on Wednesday June 24, 2009 | Permalink | Comment [4]June 19, 2009
24 Songs Shared, Nearly $2-Million in Fines
Jammie Thomas-Rasset’s 2007 trial didn’t end well. That fall Ms. Thomas-Rasset, the first peer-to-peer-piracy suspect whose case reached a civil trial, was found guilty of sharing 24 songs on KaZaA, the once-popular file-sharing service, and ordered to pay $220,000 to Capitol Records. Then she got a second shot: The judge who had heard that case called a mistrial, explaining that he had given the jury improper instructions.
But for Ms. Thomas-Rasset, trial No. 2 turned out far worse than the first one. Yesterday a federal jury again found her guilty of sharing those 24 songs, this time adding charges of “willful infringement,” and hit her with a $1.92-million penalty.
That’s $80,000 per song, a rate that even the RIAA might not have dared to expect. Ms. Thomas-Rasset called the figure “kind of ridiculous,” according to the Associated Press, but she didn’t say whether she would appeal the verdict or pursue a settlement.
The plaintiff, the Recording Industry Association of America, said it was satisfied with the decision. “We are pleased that the jury agreed with the evidence and found the defendant liable,” Cara Duckworth, a spokesperson for the trade group, said in a written statement. “Since day one, we have been willing to settle this case and we remain willing to do so.”
The RIAA didn’t crow about the size of Ms. Thomas-Rasset’s fine, and that might be a smart move. The size of the verdict “may do more to hurt than help the RIAA,” said Ray Beckermann, a lawyer who has frequently opposed the trade group in court, “because it offers a vivid demonstration of how out of sync the RIAA’s damages theory is with decades of case law.” The RIAA has eased up on its once-aggressive legal campaign against piracy, and its decision to lay low may have paid dividends. But as Computerworld‘s Richi Jennings points out, the sheer size of yesterday’s award has generated plenty of blog buzz.
(Folks who are keenly interested in the trial would do well to read Ars Technica’s blow-by-blow coverage.) —Brock Read
Posted on Friday June 19, 2009 | Permalink | Comment [25]June 10, 2009
Arbitrator Rules That Google E-Mail System Does Not Violate Faculty Agreement at Canadian Campus
An arbitrator says Lakehead University, in Ontario, had the right to switch its campus e-mail service to a free program offered by Google and did not violate the collective agreement with the Lakehead University Faculty Association.
The union objected to the switch because it feared that e-mail messages could be opened by the FBI or CIA under the USA Patriot Act since Google is an American company, subject to that law. The arbitrator acknowledged in his ruling that “the likelihood of such incursions by U.S. authority into a private e-mail system (Lakehead’s own former system) was marginal compared to what might occur in the presence of the Google system.” However, he ruled in favor of the university because the wording of the collective agreement was not specific enough to ensure e-mail communication met the concerns of “absolute privacy to faculty members.”
The Canadian Association of University Teachers now intends to advise all Canadian faculty associations to review the protection of privacy wording in their contracts. —Karen Birchard
Posted on Wednesday June 10, 2009 | Permalink | Comment [3]June 5, 2009
Judge Dismisses Software-Licensing Case Against George Mason U.
A Virginia Circuit Court judge dismissed a lawsuit this morning against George Mason University’s Center for History and New Media.
Thomson Reuters Inc. had sued the university in a Virginia court in September for at least $10-million in damages, claiming that Zotero, a free software tool created by the university, made improper use of the company’s EndNote citation software.
Zotero is a plug-in for the Firefox Web browser that is designed to help scholars store and organize their online research. The program, which could convert EndNote files, had been downloaded over one million times by September.
George Mason University said in November it had not renewed a site license for EndNote, and would not make any changes to its software.
A spokesman for the university confirmed the case had been dismissed but declined to comment further. Officials at Thomson Reuters were not immediately available for comment on the dismissal. — Marc Beja
Posted on Friday June 5, 2009 | Permalink | Comment [18]June 2, 2009
Performance Rights Act Could Impose Fees on College Radio
Legislation proposed in the U.S. House of Representatives intends to require commercial radio stations to pay performance royalty fees, but it could also mean a “financial disaster” for noncommercial and community stations, including those run by students, college-radio representatives say.
The Performance Rights Act, introduced by Rep. John Conyers Jr., Democrat of Michigan, would require educational and community radio stations to pay annual fees of $500 to $1,000.
In a letter delivered to Congress yesterday under the banners of the Free Radio Alliance and College Broadcasters Inc., more than 80 faculty, staff and student representatives from colleges, universities and high schools opposed the legislation. The fees “represent large portions of annual budgets for student-operated radio stations,” according to the letter.
Representatives of radio stations at Harvard and Rice Universities, the University of Kansas, Virginia Tech, and the State University of New York at Brockport all signed the letter.
“Particularly in the present economic times — as students, their families and educational institutions face sharply increasing fiscal pressures — now is not the time to impose new fees on our small stations principally to benefit foreign-owned recording labels,” they wrote.
Internet, cable, and satellite radio stations already pay artists performance royalties, as do stations in the European Union. FM and AM stations in the U.S. currently pay royalties to songwriters and publishers, but not to performers.
“The record labels are completely out of touch as to how college radio stations operate,” wrote Warren Kozireski, president of College Broadcasters Inc., in the letter. “The extensive record keeping requirements that will be required by the Copyright Royalty Board alone will add hundreds, if not thousands of dollars to the true cost of a performance fee.”
The bill was approved by Mr. Conyer’s judiciary committee in May, but has not yet come up for a vote.
The proposed fees would be “crippling” at Harvard University, said Christa Hartsock, a rising senior. Harvard’s station,WHRB 95.3FM, is independent of the university, which means its operating budget relies on the few advertisements student representatives sell. Ms. Hartsock, who is the station’s president, is unpaid, as are the station’s other executive members and DJ’s.
“If we were forced to pay those fees, our budget would just be devastated,” she said.
Rep. Gene Green, Democrat of Texas, and Sen. Blanche L. Lincoln, Democrat of Arkansas, have introduced concurrent resolutions in the House and Senate supporting the Local Radio Freedom Act, which would protect radio stations from performance fees. Both bills are waiting to be reviewed by committees.
“We’re just one station among so many other student-run and community stations that are run by volunteers and driven by ad revenue,” Ms. Hartsock said. “We signed the letter not only to protect ourselves, but to protect other colleges and universities and communities with local, independent radio too.” —Erica R. Hendry
Posted on Tuesday June 2, 2009 | Permalink | Comment [19]May 29, 2009
College Sues Pornography Web Site Over Name
Don’t confuse the college with the pornography Web site.
National American University, which has 16 campuses across the United States and also offers online courses, is claiming that the operators of pornography sites named Fast Times at NAU and Naughty American University have been illegally using that name and the acronym NAU since 2003, the Associated Press reported.
According to the news agency, the lawsuit claims that the pornography site, operated by La Touraine Inc., is “nearly identical in sight, sound, and commercial impression” to the university’s.
The university is looking for a judge to prevent further use of the trademark, and for monetary damages.
A man at La Touraine who was contacted by the Associated Press on Thursday declined to comment. —Marc Beja
Posted on Friday May 29, 2009 | Permalink | Comment [12]May 27, 2009
Judge Says Police Should Not Have Confiscated Computers of Boston College Student
Massachusetts State Police returned several computers, cell phones, iPods, and electronic storage devices to a recent Boston College graduate after a judge invalidated a search warrant that had allowed police to seize the items from him two months ago.
Boston College police officers, with the help of state law-enforcement officials, searched the dormitory room of Riccardo Calixte in March, after his roommate accused him of hacking into the campus computer system to change grades, download illegal files, and send e-mail messages containing rumors about the roommate. Mr. Calixte, a computer-science major, also worked for the college’s IT department.
Margot Botsford, a justice of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, threw out the search warrant Thursday, saying that the roommate’s accusations — which she called “troublingly weak” — were not by themselves sufficient to give police probable cause to search Mr. Calixte’s dorm room or seize any of his possessions. She also dismissed claims that e-mails allegedly sent by Mr. Calixte could have illegally violated what she referred to as “a hypothetical Internet-use policy maintained by” the college.
John B. Dunn, director of public affairs at the college, declined to comment and referred questions to the district attorney’s office, which could not be reached for comment. Mr. Calixte graduated with a degree in computer science earlier this month. He could not be reached for comment either.
A statement issued by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, an organization that promotes Internet liberties and that represented Mr. Calixte, said he had spent the final weeks of the semester without the use of his computer, phone, or the student network, to which the college had denied him access.
The foundation’s civil-liberties director, Jennifer Stisa Granick, said the decision helped support the theory that violating a terms-of-service agreement is not a criminal offense. “It keeps terms of service and crime separate, which is something we feel very strongly about,” Ms. Granick said. —Erica R. Hendry
Posted on Wednesday May 27, 2009 | Permalink | Comment [11]May 11, 2009
'Emailgate': College Triggers Uproar With Warning of Legal Action Over Private Accounts
Plenty of universities have outsourced e-mail to companies like Google. Here’s another twist on the issue: One community college is fighting to prevent students and faculty members from using its name in their private e-mail addresses or domain names.
Santa Rosa Junior College triggered a backlash by warning of “legal action” if people failed to remove its name, Sonoma County’s Press Democrat reported.
At issue: about 100 people who include “Santa Rosa Junior College” or the acronym “SRJC” in private accounts with companies like Google and Yahoo — for example, addresses such as “JohnDoe_SRJC@yahoo.com.”
The California college says it hopes to prevent confusion over which e-mail addresses are official and which are not. Also, someone could use the acronym to trick people, a college official told the Press Democrat.
But the newspaper quoted a local attorney saying the college’s legal argument was baseless. Michael Aparicio, a Santa Rosa philosophy professor, went further. He called for an investigation and lambasted his employer in a blog post for what “seems like an aggressive act of hubris.” In a subsequent post, he dubbed the uproar “Emailgate.”
The college quickly backpedaled. Although Santa Rosa’s president, Robert Agrella, approved a letter asking that people remove the college’s name from their e-mail addresses “to avoid any future legal action,” Mr. Agrella told the Press Democrat that the college was not in fact threatening to take people to court. Letters are typically all it takes to stop unauthorized use of the college’s name, he added.
“We have never had to go any further in my 19 years here than asking the person to stop using the name,” Mr. Agrella said in the newspaper’s follow-up report. “We have people I’m sure that are going to test us. But it’s not our intent to go out and sue a lot of people.”
Mr. Agrella is right about people testing him. Another blogger accused officials from his college of being boorish bullies and invited readers to write in at her new “Special Resources for Journalistic Computing” addresses. Those would be “SRJC.Loonies@gmail.com” and “SRJC-Lunatics@vortex.com.” —Marc Parry
Posted on Monday May 11, 2009 | Permalink | Comment [12]