University Wire
09-26-2000
(The Daily Free Press) (U-WIRE) BOSTON -- Shrugging off a Sept. 22 deadline given by Metallica attorney Howard King to respond to a request to ban Napster for "ethical" reasons, Boston University did not announce its decision and did not say if it would make one at all.
BU received a letter from King approximately two weeks ago. In the letter, addressed to Chancellor John Silber, King asked BU to restrict students from the popular online music-sharing program Napster and named last Friday as the response deadline.
"[Friday] is the date by which King asked for responses. There is no magic to that date," said BU Vice President and General Council Todd Klipp, the attorney who is representing BU in the matter. "I don't think you should expect [an answer]. It is possible there will be one next week."
BU's decision not to make a decision isn't an intimidation tactic, but rather an approach that will give the University more time to think, Klipp said.
Klipp also said he didn't think the letter had an underlying threat of legal action -- a situation that isn't unprecedented.
Unlike similar efforts to restrict Napster last spring, the letter makes no explicit threat of litigation against BU. Instead, in the letter, King wrote that BU has "a moral, ethical and legal obligation" to bar access to the Web site, which enables students to download copyrighted music.
"I didn't find it particularly threatening. As lawyers' letters go, I don't think it was intended to be intimidating," Klipp said.
If BU refuses to ban Napster, King is not expected to file suit, but will educate BU about copyright infringement, according to Jim Stone, director of consulting services at the Office of Information Technology.
Technologically, banning Napster would benefit students.
"At the moment, Napster is consuming 50 percent of network band, so 50 percent will be available for other uses," Stone said.
Still, the main issue in the eyes of students is Internet censorship.
"I don't think BU as an institution should have that choice. I think it's an individual choice," said College of Arts and Sciences sophomore Frederique Garnier.
And although Garnier said she opposed the University's filtering the Internet, she added that in terms of the issue of copyright infringement, she shared the same indecisiveness as BU officials.
"I, myself, am undecided. Yes, on one hand, I worry that the artists will lose money and stop producing music. But, on the other hand, I love being able to download any song I want," Garnier said.
Some students chose to speculate on whether or not BU's lack of a stance can be construed as leaning toward banning the program.
"It gives me hope. I think that BU is putting a lot of thought into its answer, and I hope that BU won't follow the other schools that decided to ban Napster," said CAS sophomore Ariel Kratan.
Ten other colleges, including Harvard University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, last week received the same letter as BU.
While newspapers have reported that institutions such as Harvard and MIT will decide not to ban Napster, Harvard, like BU, hasn't publicized a decision.
"The response, I've been told, will most likely come next week," said Doug Gavel, Public Information Officer at Harvard News Office. "I think there are a lot of issues involved in this. There are convoluted and interesting issues on freedom of information, student access to the Web, and the complications in restricting that and the legalities of Napster."
(C) 2000 The Daily Free Press via U-WIRE
No comments:
Post a Comment