[chuck]

Originally Posted by Sean

There's no debate as far as I'm concerned.

Unfortunately - the debate has to be had here in NZ - it's been shaped/forced through by the record labels/big business. They blatantly attack the technology as the reason for piracy - read the quote I reference above - IF you use p2p - YOU WILL get infected with viruses etc, etc. The wording of the new law is insanity - and leaves the door wide open for businesses, libraries, schools all to be cut off the Net - under the accusation of guilt.

How do they prove who's downloaded what? Under the NZ law - they don't have to prove it, the ISP must terminate the connection, if they receive notice that a user has been downloading illegal content. No proof, no court case, and the user has no way to defend themselves against the charge - because you don't have to provide evidence.

Under this legislation wireless hotspots - like in Starbucks or the airport will have to be shut down, regardless of the fact that you can't prove who's downloaded what. I have a wireless point at home - how can I prove it's not been hacked by the neighbour, who's then downloaded the latest episode of Heroes.

What if an artist wants to download their own music - from a torrent site - how do they prove their the author/creator of that content. They can be cut off.

If you taped a copy of Heroes or BSG for me in the US - then mailed me the cd or the vhs tape - because it won't screen in NZ for another month - who's broken copyright?

Some good discussion here and here.

The debate is being led by certain interests here in NZ (and possibly around the globe) - and the majority of our parlimentarians are ignorant of the implications - or the consequences of a simple black and white solution.

Besides, all it's going to take is several letters of complaint to the ISP's that supply Parliament for them to realise how insane this legislation is.

Chuck - what if suddenly your students stole their lessons from you for free, so there was no way for you to be paid for teaching? Would it be cool with you to hear people say "hey - the future of teaching is writing and selling books, not teaching in a classroom".

Um - well, I give away my lessons for free, as I work in a public school. The government pays me - it's a social good/social contract kind of thing. Taxes pay my wages - just like they pay the wages of the police, the nurses, doctors, garbage collectors. I assume that my students are going to take my ideas, add them to their own experiences, combine them with the teachers, coaches and family that they have around them as they grow up and then create, design, build, write their own ideas.

NO teacher works in a vacuum - all teachers will use, reuse, reshape ideas.

I use the internet and content on the net to inform and put together the majority of my lessons. I expect my students to do the same - there's a case that could be made for leaving them all at home and telling them to use google to learn. There are dozens of websites where you can download worksheets, pdfs, lesson plans - many set up by teachers. Most homeschooling parents will do the same.

Most teachers don't expect to make money off their lesson plans, but they are their intellectual property - and so if I started putting my materials up online, I'd slap a Creative Commons notice on them - just as I do on my flickr page.

If you're talking about making knowledge propietary and enforcing copyright of ideas - that's another topic. There is grounds for it I guess - but if you look up iTunes U - or MIT's Open courseware or even TED - knowledge is getting more open, more available and oddly enough, the majority of it is FREE.