I know javajosh would agree, but seriously, is no one else extremely disturbed by the clear implications of this 'plot'?
So basically, a group of corporations can't get people to behave the way they want them to. So their idea is to literally influence the educational curriculum in the hopes that future generations will behave exactly the way they want them to.
This is probably just the tip of the iceberg on our already extremely broken education system. This is what we publicly know. For example, I wouldn't be surprised if oil companies are inserting into geology class that global warming is a hoax.
In much the same way we have separation of church and state, perhaps we should consider having a separation of corporation and state. The government's interest should solely rest with the electorate. Although we legally consider corporations people, they most certainly cannot vote and therefore they should have no influence whatsoever on government.
I know I am speaking from an idealist point of view, but the government's interests should never be aligned with corporations at the expense of the voting electorate. Which is exactly the problem with what the copyright cartel is doing.
The government point of view of schools is hardly ideal. There are plenty of examples of those in power in government using the schools to push their own agenda.
Not only that, even the notion of a common curriculum can be injustice. One good for one group of people can be injustice for another.
How would we enforce a separation of corporation and the state? From what I know, the separation of the Church and the state is to stop the government from interfering with matters of the Church.
We don't even have a mechanism to restrict the Church from interfering with the state besides taking away a privilege of tax-exempt status. I am not restriction is a bad idea. I am just not sure how it is achievable.
[Select two students who are outgoing and will be able to enjoy this activity. Send the students on a quick
(30 seconds) errand before they start drawing. Example: “Please run this note to the library.” When the
students leave, tell the class you want them to all copy one of the pictures being drawn on the white
board. Remind the class to copy the artwork without telling the volunteer artists.]
What.
I personally think that teachers who can't/won't draft their own lesson plans need to be fired. I still can't get over the fact that American textbooks also come in teacher editions with the answers to exercises provided so that the teacher doesn't have to work them out.
The grade 5 materials are more reasonable, suggesting reliance on resources like creative commons or voluntary sharing, and using real-world examples of people who work in the arts not getting paid. These are just factual; a lot of indie movies only get made because the cast & crew workf or free in exchange for an ownership interest. As pointed out below though, they don't include any discussion of fair use or the notion that copyright should exist for limited times.
> I still can't get over the fact that American textbooks also come in teacher editions with the answers to exercises provided so that the teacher doesn't have to work them out.
Pointless busywork is pointless. If they can't find the answers, you're better off addressing the root cause, not driving anyone semi-skilled away from teaching. And just how many times have you graded 50 1st grade math tests, anyhow? Especially when they come up with a new edition every year.
Very sad when we should be able to do more in the way of open source textbooks (and exercise generators), but your gripe is not well-thought out and insulting to decent teachers, of whom I have known many.
Not as simple as "can't/won't". There's also "not allowed to". If the only purpose of education is to teach to a test, and the board selects the book which was written for the test... it does kinda destroy teacher's individuality, but since that seems to be a goal...
Some other examples of rather finely defined lesson plans nearly to the point of reading a teleprompter are "human growth and development" which is finely crafted to keep the religious nutcases under control, and "nutrition" which is pretty much whatever the farm lobby wants to sell and anything related to illegal drugs/tobacco/alcohol.
There is very little point in firing a teacher for teaching to a lesson plan if the board that hired the teacher very nearly dictated exactly what to say. Any replacement would simply be somewhat less rebellious and more authoritarian, not exactly an improvement.
I am going to flip this around... we should be teaching children the basics of research, citation, fair use and permission at a young level.
By encouraging children to go off and research and create I hypothesis that they will naturally lean towards simple, creative commons and other "free" or "libre" licenses and start to actively seek these out in favour of more tightly controlled, restrictive, corporate licensing schemes.
Teaching them how to cite, what fair use is and how to ask seek permission from content authors gives them the tools to fight overly restrictive copyright laws - and hopefully, one day, abolish them in favour of sane, time bounded licenses
I'm actually impressed at how slanted the title is. Using the words "cartel" and "indoctrinate" hits on two major scare points and we don't even have to read a word of the article. Very tough for me to trust what they have to say since they didn't think the words themselves were convincing enough.
"Cartel" seems like a distortion to me, too, but "indoctrinate" seems like a perfectly valid label for the attempt to systematically teach small children to support a political stance. If you wouldn't call that true indoctrination, what would qualify?
Yes, it has angered me for many years - and has been a bitter regret my entire life - that my public school basically forced me to break the law for so many years, and never more egregiously than when I made my collages.
To all of the authors, photographers, and publishers of the many magazines and newspapers that I defaced and stole from: I am so, so sorry. I never realized that it was your work, your life blood, and your property that I was so recklessly and wantonly stealing from. My teachers never even mentioned the word "copyright" and I had no idea I had to ask your permission, individually. Of course, ignorance of the law is no excuse, even for a young child, and now I have to live with the shame and the guilt every day.
There are many ways that America's schoolchildren have wronged the members of the RIAA and the MPAA. But record companies and the movie industry aren't the only ones victimized by school children. Literally millions of school papers are written every year, containing billions of quotations and materials, some quoted at length, and virtually none of those papers asked the original creator for permission.
I don't live in the South so I don't really know how much that is happening. However, I would imagine that allowing well-funded corporate interests to write curriculum is far more insidious than creationism in the classroom.
Religious indoctrination (like Creationism) comes from the community, and only exists in schools in places where the community enables it (like the South). Lobbying has no boundaries.
I'd love to see people stand up to Big Religion, but... how? Religion is institutionalized mental and physical child abuse and everybody seems a-okay with all of it.
The doesn't seem HORRIBLE: although it may not be good that external companies are influencing the curriculum, an understanding of copyright seems like an idea that is understandable for the CSLA to want to teach in some regard.
I agree that giving kids an accurate understanding is important — the problem with these teaching materials is that they're being very selective in which parts of copyright law that they teach: According to the linked article, there's no mention of Fair Use provisions, which the record industry would much rather you didn't take advantage of, in the curriculum at all.
I find the scheme abominable because corporations are attempting to mold the unconscious minds of elementary school students to morally support specific political policies (viz. copyright). And they're using public education as the distribution method for their propaganda.
[+] [-] mav3r1ck|12 years ago|reply
So basically, a group of corporations can't get people to behave the way they want them to. So their idea is to literally influence the educational curriculum in the hopes that future generations will behave exactly the way they want them to.
This is probably just the tip of the iceberg on our already extremely broken education system. This is what we publicly know. For example, I wouldn't be surprised if oil companies are inserting into geology class that global warming is a hoax.
In much the same way we have separation of church and state, perhaps we should consider having a separation of corporation and state. The government's interest should solely rest with the electorate. Although we legally consider corporations people, they most certainly cannot vote and therefore they should have no influence whatsoever on government.
I know I am speaking from an idealist point of view, but the government's interests should never be aligned with corporations at the expense of the voting electorate. Which is exactly the problem with what the copyright cartel is doing.
[+] [-] WalterBright|12 years ago|reply
The government point of view of schools is hardly ideal. There are plenty of examples of those in power in government using the schools to push their own agenda.
Not only that, even the notion of a common curriculum can be injustice. One good for one group of people can be injustice for another.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_assimilation_of_Native...
[+] [-] 3825|12 years ago|reply
We don't even have a mechanism to restrict the Church from interfering with the state besides taking away a privilege of tax-exempt status. I am not restriction is a bad idea. I am just not sure how it is achievable.
[+] [-] anigbrowl|12 years ago|reply
[Select two students who are outgoing and will be able to enjoy this activity. Send the students on a quick (30 seconds) errand before they start drawing. Example: “Please run this note to the library.” When the students leave, tell the class you want them to all copy one of the pictures being drawn on the white board. Remind the class to copy the artwork without telling the volunteer artists.]
What.
I personally think that teachers who can't/won't draft their own lesson plans need to be fired. I still can't get over the fact that American textbooks also come in teacher editions with the answers to exercises provided so that the teacher doesn't have to work them out.
The grade 5 materials are more reasonable, suggesting reliance on resources like creative commons or voluntary sharing, and using real-world examples of people who work in the arts not getting paid. These are just factual; a lot of indie movies only get made because the cast & crew workf or free in exchange for an ownership interest. As pointed out below though, they don't include any discussion of fair use or the notion that copyright should exist for limited times.
[+] [-] mikegagnon|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Natsu|12 years ago|reply
Pointless busywork is pointless. If they can't find the answers, you're better off addressing the root cause, not driving anyone semi-skilled away from teaching. And just how many times have you graded 50 1st grade math tests, anyhow? Especially when they come up with a new edition every year.
Very sad when we should be able to do more in the way of open source textbooks (and exercise generators), but your gripe is not well-thought out and insulting to decent teachers, of whom I have known many.
[+] [-] VLM|12 years ago|reply
Some other examples of rather finely defined lesson plans nearly to the point of reading a teleprompter are "human growth and development" which is finely crafted to keep the religious nutcases under control, and "nutrition" which is pretty much whatever the farm lobby wants to sell and anything related to illegal drugs/tobacco/alcohol.
There is very little point in firing a teacher for teaching to a lesson plan if the board that hired the teacher very nearly dictated exactly what to say. Any replacement would simply be somewhat less rebellious and more authoritarian, not exactly an improvement.
[+] [-] AmiiJewels|12 years ago|reply
By encouraging children to go off and research and create I hypothesis that they will naturally lean towards simple, creative commons and other "free" or "libre" licenses and start to actively seek these out in favour of more tightly controlled, restrictive, corporate licensing schemes.
Teaching them how to cite, what fair use is and how to ask seek permission from content authors gives them the tools to fight overly restrictive copyright laws - and hopefully, one day, abolish them in favour of sane, time bounded licenses
[+] [-] IvyMike|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] seiji|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gojomo|12 years ago|reply
http://reason.com/blog/2012/12/03/dare-americas-most-famous-...
[+] [-] jackschultz|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] emiliobumachar|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jlangenauer|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] arh68|12 years ago|reply
>Artists are “graded” or valued by how many people buy their work.
>We hope others will respect our work ... And we ‘play fair’ with their work too.
No mention of Melchior Rietveldt, Patrick Robin, of course. And certainly nothing like Courtney Love Does The Math.
[+] [-] javajosh|12 years ago|reply
To all of the authors, photographers, and publishers of the many magazines and newspapers that I defaced and stole from: I am so, so sorry. I never realized that it was your work, your life blood, and your property that I was so recklessly and wantonly stealing from. My teachers never even mentioned the word "copyright" and I had no idea I had to ask your permission, individually. Of course, ignorance of the law is no excuse, even for a young child, and now I have to live with the shame and the guilt every day.
There are many ways that America's schoolchildren have wronged the members of the RIAA and the MPAA. But record companies and the movie industry aren't the only ones victimized by school children. Literally millions of school papers are written every year, containing billions of quotations and materials, some quoted at length, and virtually none of those papers asked the original creator for permission.
What have we become?
[+] [-] foobarbazqux|12 years ago|reply
A nation of thieves. Actually, seems we started that way.
[+] [-] lawnchair_larry|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kintamanimatt|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jcromartie|12 years ago|reply
Religious indoctrination (like Creationism) comes from the community, and only exists in schools in places where the community enables it (like the South). Lobbying has no boundaries.
[+] [-] seiji|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] joliv|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] timw6n|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mikegagnon|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Ygg2|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jmgrosen|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] aqme28|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tpainton|12 years ago|reply