by Mike Masnick
Fri, Feb 8th 2008 8:44am
Late last year, we wrote about a bill that would put pressure on universities to put in place an official approved music subscription service or risk losing federal financial aid support for students. This is a bizarre piece of legislation, as it effectively props up Napster and RealNetworks by basically requiring universities to sign up for such a service, even if they don't want to. Despite widespread criticism of the bill, the House has now approved it, even leaving out a promised amendment promising that failure to obey wouldn't threaten financial aid. Supporters of the bill claim that it wouldn't actually be used to cut off financial aid, but if that's the case, why include it in this bill at all? It would basically be a requirement without any repercussions for ignoring. At the same time, no one has clearly explained why universities should be required to sign up for a private music subscription offering. What possible public policy reason could there be for such a thing?
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- EU Commission Releases Plans To More Directly Regulate Internet, Pretending It's Not Regulating The Internet
- Hollywood Writers & Copyright Scholars Point Out That Piracy Fears Over Open Set Top Boxes Are Complete FUD
- Copyright As Censorship: Questionable Copyright Claim Forces Indie Musician To Destroy All Physical Copies Of New Album
- Apple Facing Trial Over Whether Its Use Of DRM Violated Antitrust Laws
- Ding Dong: Another DRM Is Dead... And With It All The Files You Thought You Bought