Federal aid threatened by new bill

By Gina Belmonte

The entertainment industry continues to find new ways to combat copyright violations on university campuses -- this time it has turned to the federal government.

Under the College Opportunity and Affordability Act of 2007, students face the potential risk of losing their federal student aid if universities do not offer alternatives to illegal downloading. The bill, HR 4137, has been introduced to the House of Representatives and is up for debate in the coming weeks.

While HR 4137 is a massive education bill, one provision of the bill, titled "Campus-based Digital Theft Prevention," is sparking controversy among students and university officials. Section 494 first mandates institutions to publicize policies and procedures relating to illegal downloading and sharing of copyrighted material. The second part of the section -- and the most contested -- requires institutions to plan to offer alternatives to illegal downloading as well as explore tools and software to prevent such illegal activity.

Universities that fail to comply are subject to a loss of federal student aid funding, ultimately penalizing every student who receives federal financial aid -- regardless of whether they participate in the illegal activity. Loss in such funding would affect those with Pell grants, Stafford and Perkins student loans, as well as those with work study funded by federal student aid, according to Neena Dagnino, office manager of the Financial Aid Office.

The required alternatives to illegal file sharing imposed by the bill can mean something as simple as putting up a Web site with links to places like iTunes and Rhapsody, said Ron Danielson, chief information officer.

However, other alternatives could include the university having to subscribe to download services or purchase software to control and block illegal file sharing. The extent of the threat has yet to be delineated, as the bill fails to specify exactly what is expected of the university, said Danielson.

The university seems to already be taking many illegal file-sharing precautions, said Tyler Ochoa, a Santa Clara professor of law with a specialization in copyright law.

In addition, the bill only requires the university to develop a plan that offers alternatives to illegal file sharing, not implement it, said Ochoa.

For now, the university has decided the best approach toward dealing with illegal downloading is an educational one, said Information Technology Director Carl Fussell.

Fussell cited some of the ways the university has done its best to deter illegal file sharing: Santa Clara offers an open course on illegal downloading taught by the chief information officer and copyright law professor, university representatives speak to students and parents during orientation, and a student support staff encourages other alternatives to illegal downloading.

Still, section 494's potential penalties to ensure the profit of the entertainment industry at the expense of students seem harsh, said Danielson.

"Universities should not play as tools for the tyrants," said Richard Stallman, copyrights activist and peer-to-peer sharing advocate, in a symposium speech on campus last Thursday.

Stallman argued universities should not keep records of illegal file-sharing activity that would help the corporate interests of the entertainment industry.

For liability reasons, the university releases student information upon the receipt of subpoenas, court orders that demand the identification of students, said Fussell.

Preliminary to subpoenas, Digital Millennium Copyright Act notifications are notices of alleged copyright infringement that have been traced to a computer in the network.

These notifications also request that the university retain records to identify the violators and ask them to preserve the copyright infringing materials.

The university could be called into court to testify and would not deliberately destroy information related to a potential legal action, said Danielson.

The RIAA has issued 20 DMCA notes to Santa Clara students since the beginning of the academic year, a low number for an institution of this size, said Danielson. Still, he said he believes the entertainment industry appears to be unfairly targeting higher education institutions.

Some students said they think the bill could be effective.

"If I downloaded music I'd probably stop," said freshman Jake Echeverria. "I'm just not into music that much, I think, but I'm definitely into my FAFSA."

Others feel there are probably better methods of punishment.

"I don't think it's right to punish an entire group for the actions of a few," said freshman Dan Pursley. "You can target the few that are doing it and then let the RIAA deal with it. It seems like it's their fight, not the school's."

Yet to be debated by the House during the next couple of weeks, the bill has a long road ahead before becoming a tangible threat.

First it has to pass, then an institution may have to lose its financial aid and go to court before universities can be sure what exactly this legislation means, said Danielson.

Rather than anticipate the potential consequences, Stallman said he urges people to contact their representatives and express their disfavor before the entertainment industry's grip on democracy gets too tight.

Correction: The story incorrectly stated that, if bill HR 4137 is passed, students face the potential risk of losing federal student aid if peer-to-peer Internet file sharing continues on campus. Students could potentially lose federal aid if the university fails to offer alternatives to illegal downloading, regardless of whether students continue to illegally download.

Contact Gina Belmonte at (408) 554-4546 or gbelmonte@scu.edu.