educational uses – massive open online courses (“MOOCs”)
participating in Massive Open Online Courses (“MOOCs”) to circumvent access
controls on lawfully made and acquired motion pictures and other audiovisual
works for purposes of criticism and comment. This exemption has been requested
for audiovisual material made available in all formats, including DVDs
protected by CSS, Blu-ray discs protected by AACS, and TPM-protected online
distribution services.
Property Law Clinic, American University
When Wind Done Gone is fair use, it’s fair use in hardback, audiobook, ebook.
So too with teaching. If lectures in a physical classroom are fair, so are
lectures in Coursera. But there are virtually no film studies courses offered
on MOOC platforms, unlike regular course catalogs, because of no exemption.
Fair use can and does operate at scale. The Daily Show uses a wide variety of
clips every night to poke fun of this town and media coverage of this
town. Clips are then made available
online to be shared by millions. VCRs
and DVRs reach millions; search engines create search indexes—all of these uses
are litigated fair, and just because they’re big doesn’t mean they can’t be
fair. If concerns raised about
platform/scale and activities become unfair when big, that would be bad news
for motion pictures. MOOCs may be used as marketing tools, opponents say, and
if a MOOC too lucrative and fun to be fair use, then what do we say about South Park? Highlight reels for Baltimore Ravens? If big,
and fun, and sometimes making money can still be fair use, then MOOCs can be
fair use.
exemption?
interesting contrast between (1) and (2)—several pages of requirements for
blanket protection w/out having to consider fair use. MOOCs wouldn’t fall within that blanket.
satisfy those requirements.
Charlesworth: let’s start with what the law does allow. [Unlike fair use, which the law doesn’t
allow?] If students are officially
enrolled, etc.
generally considered difficult to comply with. Universities typically do not
try to implement it as a means of being lawful; the boxes are perceived as too
difficult to tick off. The specific tech requirements for using DRM on the clips,
for example, are too difficult. My understanding is that it’s already a dead
letter. So it wouldn’t be useful for MOOCs either.
designed by Congress—should we ignore this entire part of the statute when
talking about online education?
lawful use. That was seen to be useful at the time, but in the field, the safe
harbor described is too small. We know
that it’s not designed to replace fair use.
helpful?
this would be a helpful starting point, but it doesn’t go far enough. A lot of
the terms are unclear. Even though it’s
very detailed, it’s still uncertain: how long can the material be available
online? But better than nothing.
when you’d want to use more than a short portion. Imagine 2-hour class session,
MOOC or physical. You might see
cumulatively ½ an hour, interrupted for discussion. Each clip is a short portion, but it’s
arguable taken together. I would say as
used in the classroom, clearly fair use, but that would be the kind of thing we
want flexibility for.
abuse. Overlooks the fact that any
potential infringement would be much easier to ID and address. Software tools
owners currently used to locate content on the web will quickly locate
allegedly infringing content. The notion
of harm also ignores reality. We all know circumvention tools are widely
available and widely used. Thus abuse of
an exemption in a MOOC could have no discernible impact on the level of
infringing activity. In 9 years of higher ed exemption, not one reported
instance of circumvention leading to infringement.
and have no restrictions on scope or users or availability—what’s your
definition of a MOOC in relation to traditional instruction?
definition would be ok, given the widespread availability of DVD circumvention
already. Open enrollment, closed
enrollment, nonprofit, for-profit, makes no difference. Starting w/ a narrower
definition might be a way to gain comfort.
open, online, and it is a course. In the
meantime we found an OED definition: a course of study made available over the
internet without charge to a large number of people.
space?
try—people pay for certificates of completion.
but to get a certificate of completion you can pay. Or companies may pay for their employees to
take it. There are other models.
South Park on YouTube with a minute of commentary and saying that it was a
course?
and I don’t think you can. We can augment
the definition. Courses could be offered
by or in partnership with an institution; with an institution w/ an educational
mission.
infringing. This is in addition to the
basic way we deal with problems of this sort, which is copyright law. (Lots of South
Park clips are already there.)
restrictions it’s less likely to be noninfringing. [Unless the definition includes
“noninfringing,” which is a restriction,
and makes it more than likely that everything under the exemption will be
noninfringing.]
Decherney: clarification—Coursera and Udacity offer platforms for others to
offer MOOCs. Universities may use them to offer MOOCs. Just b/c the platform is
for-profit doesn’t mean the institution offering the course is for-profit.
in any way? Do you qualify for 110(2)?
far as I know, none of the videos we provide have DRM, so they wouldn’t
qualify. I’m planning a course in October.
Under the UPenn version of this, student must pay to get a certificate
of completion in some cases. My course
will be through EdX, which will have certificate of completion for free. Content will be similar to course on history
of Hollywood—clips with criticism and commentary. Canned lecture online rather
than interacting with students. Excerpts: average lecture time is 4:30—with a
quiz or activity; videos are very short and thus clips are short.
years. I don’t know if I’d offer the
course; unlikely without an exemption.
How many lectures = course? 8
weeks, 30-40 hours of lectures, of which some portion would be clips. We always
provide high def.
TPMs? Any other concerns about that definition?
gun, but people are concerned—Khan Academy, National Geographic Society, World
Bank, UNICEF won’t qualify.
be available the whole semester? Just
the week? Confusion over what the limits
mean.
can declare they’re a student or are teaching a MOOC. [The horror! Someone might make clips
available on the internet, with commentary!]
Band says you can always go to court, but part of the purpose of the
DMCA was to avoid going to court via TPMs so you didn’t have to go after
individual users of material. Tech
reasonably deployed to protect the work by itself. [Though that ship has
sailed, as Band pointed out.] This proceeding is a fail-safe, if a TPM goes too
far. Undermines purpose of DMCA.
using 110(2)? [B/c the DMCA makes it separately illegal?] More broadly, this was Congress expressing
how they expected the online educational environment to work. Congress thought there
ought to be TPMs. If it’s inconvenient, that’s too bad/that’s what the law is. [Or you could rely on fair use.]
clips? [Depends on what you mean by TPMs.]
personally do it. Ability to make use of encryption—you can encrypt your email
w/standard setting; you can encrypt content on your computer w/ a standard
setting—not rocket science. [Um, no, it’s computer science, and encrypting
content on your computer is different from sending it.] If you are sending to computer linked to TV,
you can trigger HDCP over HDMI to the TV—triggered by the output itself. [So much for extending courses to people who
can’t afford a lot of equipment].
the course be enough?
prevent retention of work by recipient and further dissemination of the
work. It is a TPM that as it’s
transmitted works in the same way that AACS works [so we need a license?] [not
clear that a password wouldn’t do that if the result is a stream]. Doesn’t know
if individual clip would have to be isolated, but at least the clip would have
to be protected.
under TEACH Act, would you still oppose?
exemption.
use of circumvention tools because we’d be promoting the use of these tools for
getting the clip in the first place.
continuation of the others.
to TEACH Act qualified, it would be consistent with DVDCCA’s other positions to
say that DVD exemption would be consistent w/what’s already been done.
that the kinds of exemptions requested make it incumbent on requesters to say “this
is how we can analogize to the requirements Congress placed on how Congress
envisioned online education to work w/r/t online education.” They haven’t done
so.
has been maintained—last year judge granted injunction. [So an exemption could hardly change that.]
Unbounded exemption would undermine the DVD CSS licensing system/trust in that
system. If you walk into a legitimate retail store and buy a DVD player, it
does conform to the requirements of the license. That system has been
maintained notwithstanding the broad hack.
Motion Picture Association of America, Recording Industry Association of America
(Joint Creators and Copyright Owners): Movie studios do rely on fair use all
the time, and we don’t oppose fair use. We just oppose this exemption,
especially its scope and breadth. Comes close to a disallowed use-based
exemption for all educational uses online, which isn’t comforting.
extending it to 110(2)—is that too far?
requirements in place and adding something from the TEACH Act would be
preferable to what’s proposed.
courses—inhibiting effect?
clips. Massive and open has wrong implications. If you’re trying to get this
done in 5 minutes, you might not want a lot of clips, which might be one reason
it’s not happening.
actor, and my personal preference would be to make each university build its
own platform to get an exemption as the TEACH Act requires. [Hunh? Even 110(2)
doesn’t go that far—do they have to invent their own encryption too? Run their
own cables?] He took an existing film
course and found it effective. In week 5, the professor just sits in front of a
webcam, as you’d see on YouTube, and lectures. So no one expects perfection, so
request for high quality images is less compelling. [No quality for you, proles!]
know that a copy of a movie on a P2P network because a student was introduced to
circumvention tech in a classroom. The burden is on them on these issues b/c
that evidence is difficult/impossible to collect. [They spend a lot of money
studying the causes of piracy; they embed codes in screeners; they could get
this data if it were there, but they don’t even list it as a risk factor in SEC
filings.]
We record the content, available on their platform, and discussion/exams take
place in Coursera.
and Coursera, competitors?
for different kinds of courses. Like publishing w/ many publishers. We use
iTunes U; we use YouTube; we want to disseminate our research.
the panel started—it’s a big phenomenon. It means that if there are adverse
effects—that having an ecosystem of learning w/no film courses is a bad thing—they
are big adverse effects. Joint Creators
have said it’s really easy and cheap to find the movies you want to watch if
you’re a consumer. People will do that, instead of trying to watch 5 minutes of
Decherney and trying to put a movie back together.
other limitations/negative effects?
Someone who wants to teach the WWII will have the same problem. Anyone who
wants to teach w/media. For methodological reasons, the easiest way to show
that was to count film course.
offer that?
that say they have a hands off policy for moving images for MOOCs across the
board, as a result of conversations w/GCs and IT folks. They just tell people that it’s off limits
for everyone.
online course by the university—are there different rules for clips?
different, even though maybe some do qualify.
Turnbull: If you have IT guys involved, they can certainly use screencap
software and use a high quality pro camera to record off the screen as
alternatives. One of the reasons some other exemptions are workable is that
there is an institution that you can approach if there is a problem. The
arrangement here might let UPenn say it’s Coursera’s problem and Coursera might
say it’s UPenn’s problem.
[Seriously? Because universities
routinely say it’s Apple’s problem when someone misuses an Apple computer on
campus?]
responsibility for content. And Penn is the one that would be violating the
exemption if it’s the one that’s doing the circuvmention. Please also note that
we don’t know whether screencap involves circumvention. It’s nice to say so,
but an exemption would be appropriate for all.
way to lower the cost of education. We
don’t know what they will ultimately look like, but this is the future, and we
want good courses—the notion of teaching the history of Hollywood with stills
is absurd. Culture pervaded by media
means that online courses need high quality video.
Butler: reply comment: German professor wants a German MOOC using films as a
great part of the curriculum.
between MOOC and online course offering in treatment of motion pictures?
you have to apply, and pay, and there’s a small group with more interactivity
w/faculty and students. MOOCs have
helped us clarify what we offer in smaller online courses and live classes. You
get Penn course credit for online course.
I’ve taught similar classes and used clips in those classes.
that? Did you circumvent to include
clips?
used clips I use in face to face class. Right
now MOOCs are novel.
Would they see a full screen of you playing the clip?
Adobe platform that allows me to show clips and everyone can view it or
I can talk over it. Would be possible to have prerecorded videos there.
seems covered by the existing exemption. We don’t encrypt the output, but I don’t
know what the platform does.
been applied. There are platforms
available to do the encryption.
this exemption?
presentations, so they can do the same work they can do in other face to face
classes and online courses, which is the rule for every other kind of student
work output like writing. Multimedia presentations
are a major part of student work today, replacing essays.
MOOC? Depends on whether I’m watching on
broadband.
out HD quality video b/c we think it’s important. Students in China were having
trouble, so we partnered with a mirroring site to give them HQ access.
degraded regardless.
will be lower than SD, right?
about the huge number of people who could potentially qualify and could lead to
confusion and unfortunate consequences. No examples in the record.
eligible for existing exemption—which is more than current MOOC enrollment.
Lots of people already eligible and no catastrophe.
from Blogger http://ift.tt/1FDpeJ4