Dear Editor,
We read with interest the article "File-sharing at Tufts leads to record number of copyright complaints" and the editorial "Copyright holders should not strong-arm students" printed by the Daily on Feb. 15, both of which highlighted the fact that the number of students facing disciplinary and legal action for copyright [infringement] has increased. We would like to respond to several matters included in the editorial.
We agree that the university has a responsibility to educate students on copyright and ownership of creative and intellectual property. Tufts does so through a number of channels, such as making all students aware of the university Information Technology Responsible Use Policy and requiring that any student who is found to have engaged in unauthorized file-sharing take and pass a course on copyright as a condition to continuing to use the Tufts network.
Each copyright-infringement claim sent to the university contains the specific Internet Protocol (IP) address of the user as well as the time of the alleged infraction. Prior to removing any student from the network or supplying the student's information in response to a subpoena or settlement offer, University Information Technology makes certain that the offending machine did in fact hold that address at the time specified in the infringement notice. The information available in these notices is always shared with students. The accused individuals rarely deny that they downloaded files or that they had file-sharing software on their computers that could have uploaded files to others. The only issue, therefore, is the amount of damages.
The reason few cases go to trial nationwide is precisely because most defendants do not dispute that they engaged in file sharing. The two file-sharing cases that have gone to trial — one involving a Minnesota woman, the other involving a Boston University graduate student — were both won by the Recording Industry Association of America (although a judge substantially reduced the damages assessed against the graduate student).
While we agree with the Daily's lament that damages claimed by the recording industry in infringement cases may be seen as excessive, the fact remains that the law entitles plaintiffs to make such claims. It is unreasonable for the Daily to suggest that the university should shield its students from accountability for their actions.
As Daphne Kolios' article pointed out, the university is legally required under the Higher Education Opportunity Act of 2008 to have a policy that deters unauthorized peer-to-peer file-sharing and to have plans that effectively combat unauthorized distribution of copyrighted material.
We do everything possible to warn students not to engage in illegal file-sharing. In the end, it is the responsibility of every student to understand the risks and consequences of violating the law.
Sincerely,
Martin A. Oppenheimer
Senior Counsel for Business and Corporate Affairs
Judi Vellucci
Tufts OnLine Supervisor
