Mass Communication Law – Thinking Out Loud, aka The Broad Gaze

My take on copyright “education” via 6 strikes

I haven’t written much here about my dissertation research, but occasionally there’s a story that expresses well the point I’m attempting to make — law doesn’t work well when it’s misaligned with social norms.

Internet Service Providers (ISPs) have just revealed their new strategy for working with the content industries to crack down on internet piracy (How ISPs will do “six strikes”: Throttled speeds, blocked sites | Ars Technica). The approach takes 3 phases: notice, acknowledgement, and punishment. A spokesperson said that the goal was not to stop heavy-downloading “serial pirates.”

[ISPs goal is to] educate “the vast majority of the people for whom trading in copyrighted material has become a social norm.”

The 3 steps certainly have a better chance of success than the bland, generic copyright “education” of the past, but still might fall short for achieving the kind of change content owners are looking for.

My research is starting to reveal that norms usually trump law, despite “education” efforts. Media effects and psychological theories point to difficulty of overcoming factors like our natural tendency to think heuristically and the power of group norms. I’m sure these measures will bring a small decrease in downloading, but I predict a push-back as our culture engages in more online creativity. Especially if that creativity is an individual’s livelihood!

I’d argue that there are also issues of private enforcement of law here, but that is an issue for another day.

Journalist arrested while videotaping police is not guilty

Great story about a journalist taking on intimidation by police: Jury says journalist arrested while videotaping police is not guilty | Ars Technica.

In a Thursday interview, Miller told us that the prosecution accused him of “being antagonistic to police because I was questioning their orders.” However, he said, “thats what I do. I know my rights. I know the law.”

That little bit of legal knowledge (who knows where he picked it up) deepened his coverage and brought to light a case where the police overstepped their bounds. One could learn the law on their own, but I’d argue that this is one excellent argument for journalism schools.

Misunderstanding the law – the story of illegal MOOCs in Minnesota

Yesterday a big story broke in the arena of state higher ed law: Minnesota bans Coursera: State takes bold stand against free education. A letter was supposedly sent to MOOC provider Coursera, informing them of a Minnesota statute that prohibits institutions from offering education to Minnesota residents without registering with the state:

State law prohibits degree-granting institutions from offering instruction in Minnesota without obtaining permission from the office and paying a registration fee.

Naturally, the idea of a state prohibiting free, online education angered the internets and the story went viral (at least among my education technology peers).

But the story wasn’t over yet. Officials in charge of enforcing the statute have clarified their position, essentially stating that out-of-state MOOCs are beyond their pervue (Slate’s correction: Minnesota Coursera ban: State won’t crack down on free online courses after all).

“I don’t care what they do; we don’t regulate them,” George Roedler, the manager of institutional registration and licensing at the Minnesota Office of Higher Education, told Ars on Thursday.

For me, the interest in the story is in the changing story of the law. Research shows that, once misinformation has been spread, it’s very difficult to correct these misperceptions (a short description of the phenomenon). When that error is related to law, it might be more likely to impact behavior — either towards compliance, or driving people to rebel against it. Except for those who might follow a story closely, it is likely that any corrections might be missed.

This is why it’s important for journalists to be careful about reporting that “the law says ___.” The law is open to interpretation and change. Some care in called for in using language like “crack down” — especially given how easy it is to inflame social media users to quickly spread a rumor.

YouTube changes takedown policy

In the course of my dissertation research, I’ve spoken with a number of people who have been affected by takedowns. Works completely of their own, sometimes with no offending material, have been taken down. This results in less exposure and potential loss of revenue.

These new rules will help the little guy.

Under the new rules announced Wednesday, however, if the uploader challenges the match, the alleged rights holder must abandon the claim or file an official takedown notice under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Falsely representing ownership in a DMCA flap may expose one to potential monetary damages.

via YouTube Alters Copyright Algorithms, Will Manually Review Some Claims | Threat Level | Wired.com.