Syracuse University's indirect cooperation with the Recording Industry Association of America in handling cases of students accused of downloading or file-sharing is wrong. File-sharing is a modern reality the RIAA must accept and evolve with in order to survive alongside it. Downloading and file-sharing has been found to have little correlation with the decrease of record sales, something the RIAA has had difficulty dealing with. Bringing lawsuits against a young consumer base is not only an example of bad business practice but also morally bankrupt.
The Daily Orange finds the university's current cooperation with the RIAA problematic for several reasons.
As the policy now stands, SU acquiesces with requests from the RIAA to shut down the ports of IP addresses the industry has found frequently downloading or sharing files. The punishment for this is seemingly lax; it entails Internet connections being shut down for a period of roughly 24 hours. However, it includes also the accused students being forced to sign a form of admission they have done wrong and a promise to desist downloading and/or file-sharing. At first glance, this may seem trivial; however, SU eventually turns the forms, which include the signatures of accused students, over to the RIAA.
Therefore, SU is indirectly handing over the names of its students to the RIAA and thereby cooperating with the industry. The relationship this school has with the recording industry is not explicit and should not be confused as such. But The Daily Orange insists that SU's compliance in this manner with the RIAA is a serious disservice to the student body.
Given the cost to attend this school in addition to an obligation to protect its students' interests, SU should go to bat for those who are accused of downloading or file-sharing. New York University has done this, and though they may be forced through court cases to ultimately yield the names of their students to the RIAA, such a stance is a bold statement speaking to the support NYU is giving to its students as well as to the ridiculousness of the RIAA's offensive thrusts to attack the millions who download music.
SU should require verification that the students accused of frequent downloading by the RIAA are actually guilty of such an offense. Simply going on the good faith of the accusation violates the very spirit of any academic method this university is supposed to uphold: that the burden of proof lies on he or she who makes the claim.
Furthermore, SU should not hand over the forms they have accused students sign, which are in effect confessions of supposed "wrongdoing." SU should maintain the anonymity of its students in these cases. The cases should be handled internally and be treated no differently from any other Judicial Affairs cases. Increasing Computing and Media Services authority on these matters seems a reasonable compromise. But under no circumstances should SU ever directly or indirectly give the names of its students to the RIAA. SU should be especially wary that they are handing over names in the form of signed confessions.
According to CMS, 63 percent of SU students illegally download songs, movies, and software from the Internet. SU should protect these individuals given the moral ambiguity associated with this issue, and maintain protection until the RIAA realizes the frivolity of their suits against file-sharing and downloading.
is a member of the 
Be the first to comment on this article!