Harvard Crimson Music Sharing

Harvard students who download music illegally are already supposed to be accountable to the University, which states in its Computer Rules and Responsibility agreement that the University can terminate the network access of anyone found violating intellectual property. But if something like the anti-piracy bills being considered by state legislatures in Tennessee and Illinois come to Massachusetts, Harvard itself could be accountable to the state for its students’ behavior. The legislation in question would force public and private universities to actively police their networks for illegal sharing of music and movies, and would take action against colleges that do not sufficiently reduce such downloading.

With such legislation, the states—and the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), which some fear will lobby for similar laws in other states—are seeking to outsource the work of enforcing copyright laws to colleges. Ensuring that networks are free of music sharing requires a massive investment in monitoring information and analyzing data flows to make sure that no copyrighted material is being transferred. Such monitoring could cost colleges millions of dollars, according to some critics.

Universities should not have to serve as copyright policemen, especially since the laws are entirely against the interests of its students and only serve the music industry. Essentially taxing educational instiutions to preserve the record companies’ business model is an abhorrent way to protect entrenched interests. Such tactics would not even come close to solving the problem, since college students are responsible only a small part of music downloads. Clearly this new wave of legislation marks a cynical attempt by the RIAA and the states to focus on college students rather than other offenders because of the ease with which enforcement can be outsourced to universities.