University Tests Legal File Downloading System 260
philospher writes "Dorm students at Northern Illinois University are testing a legal file downloading service. It is made by Ruckus Network, and was developed by a group of MIT students. NIU pays 5$ a month per student, and the students can get music, movies, TV shows, local content and community features. Sounds a lot better than having the RIAA sending you a court summons."
Good idea (Score:5, Interesting)
Legal (Score:3, Interesting)
Cornell's Trial Download Program (Score:5, Interesting)
I must have missed something.... (Score:5, Interesting)
And yes, I did RTFA, and the company website.
bring on the cease and desist's (Score:4, Interesting)
"Bryan Ajuluchukwu, a freshman economics major, is one of more than 170 students living on the third floor of Grant Towers who is testing a new downloading service. The service, called Ruckus Network, allows for those students to download music and movies."
is the equiv of posting a target on your forehead for the MPAA and the RIAA to make an "example" out of you, especially for the elusive college market (which is the one they are always, always, always after..)
Don't waste my money! (Score:5, Interesting)
But let's consider something different.....
Can't find the population of NIU...But we'll use my school's numbers....Assuming a yearlong (12-month) contract....
$5 * ~40,000 students * 12 mos. = $2.4 million
Why would I want my tuition money (which, at this campus, only pays for more construction, adminstrative wages, yet can't cover enough for class TAs) to be wasted on RIAA/MPAA/AAA-approved media? The schools are always bitching about lack of funds, yet they can somehow afford this? Bullshit...If they (students), would like to pay out of pocket, be my guest. But don't waste my tution money on it.
Working company URL... (Score:4, Interesting)
The link in the article didn't seem to work.
I still can't find anything about what makes this legal, but the company claims it numerous times.
Court Summons? (Score:3, Interesting)
But.... (Score:3, Interesting)
The universities (so far) have been more than willing to turn in a few students...The lawsuits serve only to scare people from downloading..Most are settled, and I can't think of a suit that has actually gone to court over it.
When you think about it, there really isn't a case...The U is like an ISP, and no ISP has been seriously targeted over downloading (only for not willing to turn over info to the courts)
Excerpt from their legal page (Score:5, Interesting)
So where is the guarantee that this is in fact legal, and/or you won't get hunted down by the RIAA/MPAA? How is this not breaking copyright laws?
It sounds like a nice advertisement, but might be too good to be true. The adage, "There ain't such a thing as a free lunch.", rings true. They want personal information in return. Oh, and the privacy statement reads like adware/spyware.
If institutions are to adopt this for their College networks there has to be a guarantee in writing that I won't be sued for copyright infringement. Where is the guarantee I am legally licensing this for private use?
Yeah, this seems like a good idea too, (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Think of the rhyming possibilities for 'Ruckus' (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Good idea (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Court Summons? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:I must have missed something.... (Score:2, Interesting)
Do you people not understand? (Score:2, Interesting)
Music isn't free.
Period.
This is not "blanket extortion," and really, with the money that the music industry rakes in, five bucks a month is probably more akin to their anal cavities being violated than anyone else's -- Not Everyone Pirates Music, ya know.
$5/student is a good deal.
Let's put it in perspective.
TV is broadcast. Why shouldnt it be free?
They're sending out one signal.. What's one more box on the cable system? It's not costing them anything.
Yet I bet most of you (myself included) pay over $75 a month for this, in one form or another (mine is near $100, for DirecTV and a couple DirecTiVos).
But music.. $5 a month.. is extortion?
Reality check.... cmon....
Umm (Score:3, Interesting)
Those kind of deals are starting to make sense (Score:3, Interesting)
Then they started offering some digital content at prices almost as ridiculous than the prices of the CD's that they sell on store but a least, you where able to select the songs that you want without buying the whole album. I was happy to see the progress but this wasn't good enough for me. "Fuck them, they can do better than that" was my opinion.
Now those deals are starting to make sense. The only problem is that I am not a student anymore and I don't live on a campus. I would be interested to pay for a deal that give me those kind of options.Because they are not offering that to me right now... Well... Fuck them.
Re:Don't waste my money! (Score:1, Interesting)
But perhaps, they should make a deal with Blockbuster, that for $5 per month, you as a student can rent any number of movies per month, 3 at a time.
(They could even have a Blockbuster store within campus.)
That should decrease the downloads and everyone benefits.
Would you like this way to provide content to the students?
Cheers.
Re:Do you people not understand? (Score:5, Interesting)
$5/student, whether the student WANTS IT OR NOT, just to prevent lawsuits. That IS textbook extortion.
You don't think this cost is gonna be passed onto the students, even the ones who don't even OWN computers?
Re:Do you people not understand? (Score:0, Interesting)
Only an idiot would pay those kinds of prices for tv. The same kind of idiot who fails to see how charging 5$/month for everyone when everyone isn't involved is extortion.
Re:Yay... (Score:2, Interesting)
What is it you dont understand about this ?
Im now charging YOU $5 a month for the right to listen to my next door neighbours dog barking.
Please mail it to me.
Its exactly the same thing.
Extortion, pure and simple.
WRONG. Still a subscription system (Score:3, Interesting)
This is like saying, pay us X per month, and then whenever you want to, you can download a book. Wouldn't you really rather just pay Y (which may be close to X) for the book, and then take it with and read ("play") it whenever/wherever you want?
Subscriptions are all about long-term area under the curve. Once you suck somebody into paying X every month (whether X be $5 for this service, or +$30 for cable video), those dollars really add up over the long term.
Unless you are a fairly regular user of the service, monthly subscriptions rarely make sense over purchasing and owning your own copy of the media and its content.
Oh yeah: The University may be "paying" the $5 subscription here, but of course they will pass it on to students. So service fees (or tuitions) rise.
The RIAA is still served, having passed the cost of their monopoly on to the end consumer. Previously accepted copyright practice is compromised in the process.
Re:Good idea (Score:0, Interesting)
> analogy and it's really lame.
> If you don't pay mafia protection fees, then "bad things
> happen to you".
> If you don't pay the RIAA for its monthly fee or buy it's
> content, then the only things that could happen to you > (such as not listening to Britney Spears) are good.
If the Mafia shakes down your restaurant, you can always choose to go out of business rather than pay them. Likewise, you can choose not to listen to music, rather than pay the RIAA toll. This is not freedom of choice.
The analogy with the Mafia is actually a pretty good one. Both the RIAA and the Mafia are parasites on society... they contribute little or nothing to the industries that they are associated with. Both are networks of good old boys who rake in tremendous profits for doing relatively little.
Both use fear and intimidation to try to cow the masses into submission. Really, what difference is there between "pay this fee or we will break down your door and cut your throat" and "pay this fee or we will sue you and steal your child's college money"? The difference is one of degree, not of kind.
And don't think that the RIAA takes care of its artists. If you mail a single $10 bill to the band of your choice, that will probably get them more money than buying half a dozen of their albums through RIAA channels.
I would sooner tip the waitress at Denny's $20 than give it to that fat son-of-a-bitch Jack Valentti or his cronies.
Re:Good idea (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Good idea (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Do you people not understand? (Score:3, Interesting)
Well the cost for high speed internet gets passed to the students who don't own computers. The cost of cable gets passed to students who don't own tvs. The cost of the the free medical services that many universities have gets passed to students who don't use them.
It's a service that the university provides. It's not extortion. The students know that they will be paying this fee before they pay their tuition and have every right to go to another school to save their $45 or so.
Re:Do you people not understand? (Score:2, Interesting)
IANAL. No, it's not textbook extortion. Threatening to sue someone for a bona fide violation of law is not extortion. It's deterrence. Also, five dollars a month per person cannot be considered "overcharge" even if the student can't avoid the charge. It's a legitimate service that the school has decided to pay for. We can question the merits of such a service but it's not illegal.
My main objection to "deals" like this is the effective imposition of an "RIAA Tax". I don't like monopolies charging for things someone might not even use just because they can. That said, for people who do like downloads, it's a pretty small price to pay for being legal. I wonder if it's still worth it after all the DRM restrictions (if any) are factored in.
As long as I can opt out (Score:3, Interesting)