The technical term is "deep packet inspection," a process by which universities can examine the contents of electronic files that pass back and forth on their networks to see if they contain copyrighted material like the latest M.I.A. single or an episode of Gossip Girl. It's the equivalent of requiring institutions to steam open and read every letter that passes through the campus mail. It's also expensive, slows down the entire network, and won't actually work, because the small number of students who are responsible for the most egregious piracy also tend to be the students with the technical know-how needed to stay three steps ahead of whatever new filtering mechanisms the university might devise.The entertainment industry insists that it doesn't necessarily want to go this way, but that's obviously a lie. Earlier this year, it supported legislation in Illinois and Tennessee that would have required colleges to implement "technology-based deterrents" to piracy if they received more than a certain number of infringement notices. Around the same time, colleges across the country began seeing a 20-fold increase in the number of infringement notices they received.. When colleges protested the new burden, the RIAA said their past voluntary cooperation meant they were legally obligated to comply in the future. (Inside Higher Ed)
"When colleges protested the new burden, the RIAA said their past voluntary cooperation meant they were legally obligated to comply in the future."
I'm not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV, but allow me to say this: "WHAT???" If I volunteer to do action x, I am "legally obligated" to continue doing it forever? What colossal manure! Because I am a volunteer for an organization for a specific project does not mean I am drafted for that for the rest of my life. This is pseudo-legaleze, designed to browbeat the schools, and should be ignored (or challenged directly in court)!