Search Slyck
Anonymous
Welcome
Ohio University and the File-sharing Menace
May 14, 2007
Ohio University isn’t the first and probably not the last school to place restrictions on P2P technology. In fact, P2P history is filled with colleges and universities placing various types of restrictive policies on their campus networks. However, Ohio University stands out from the rest of the crowd as it was the recipient of more legal notices from the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) than any other university.The total number of legal notices received by Ohio University has increased markedly from 2005-2006, when, according to the RIAA, the school only received 232. However, this number shot up to 1,287 notices in 2006-2007, and in February earned a top seat on the RIAA’s most frequent recipient list.
The P2P litigation process has morphed over the last year from the well-known "John Doe" routine to something now called a “pre-lawsuit” or “pre-litigation” letter. The only real difference between the two is now the RIAA gives the alleged P2P pirate the option to settle at a discount. While this option is available to both college students and consumers, its main focus is aimed at the former.
Whoever receives the pre-lawsuit letter, the ISP has to do the legwork in order to find the individual. Typically, the RIAA provides the IP address/time stamp to the ISP, which then has to track down the alleged pirate from there. That’s a lot of hours and money spent trying to match IP addresses up with exact dates and times – multiplied by over 1,000. This may not be the biggest deal to a mega-ISP such as Verizon or RoadRunner, but for a smaller campus or university, it’s a race against the clock.
No university wants the RIAA looming over their shoulders – and especially doesn’t want to be on the RIAA’s top notice list. So Ohio University did something about it - they blocked all “illegal” access to P2P networks.
The term “illegal” when used in conjunction with P2P is something of an anomaly. The only individuals prosecuted with criminal charges are top site administrators, or those running BitTorrent indexing and or/tracking sites such as EliteTorrents. Not even Grokster or BearShare were prosecuted under criminal law. Yet this has become a blanket term to describe any of the alleged civil infractions taking place on P2P networks. The term has nevertheless become entrenched in the vernacular, and frequently used to describe unauthorized file-sharing.
The move by Ohio University has met with a firestorm of criticism from students and P2P developers, especially BitTorrent President Ashwin Navin. Ashwin’s torrent of criticism was recently published and widely circulated on CNet’s News.com, where he questioned the school’s motivation and encouraged students to fight for their legitimate use of P2P technology.
“…Ohio University has demonstrated a serious lack of understanding of P2P technology's value and role on the Internet. Furthermore, the school has closed its doors to innovation and shirked its responsibilities as an educational institution.”
Ashwin wasn’t alone in his opinion. The EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) echoed many of Ashwin’s concerns, stating it creates “more collateral damage to academic freedom.”
Some diehard P2P fanatics thought they were smarter than Ohio University’s network administration, and believed that simply using DC++ in a LAN environment would circumvent this inconvenience. Yet LAN P2P has been curtailed as well, as Ohio University Chief Information Officer Brice Bible recently stated, “We’re just about illegal peer-to-peer free,” after the campus DC++ hub was knocked offline.
Slyck.com caught up with Ohio University CIO (Chief Information Officer) Bruce Bible, who answered our questions on the recent P2P policy. Is Ohio University being picked on unnecessarily? Perhaps their policy is simply misunderstood?
Slyck.com: It seems that Ohio University is taking a much more extreme measure compared to most other schools who have sought a more balanced approach. How does OU justify this approach?
Brice Bible: It is extremely common for universities to institute blocks on P2P file sharing. The OHIO approach is not extreme at all. We were able to refine our process to this point in the early stages of our P2P ban, and after two full weeks of this new policy, the process has not blocked one case of legal or legitimate P2P. We are detecting and only blocking known illegal P2P protocols. In the event that a legitimate P2P activity would be blocked because it is using a primarily illegal protocol, we have provided an exception process.
Slyck.com: There are numerous documented and legitimate uses for P2P technology. Why should these uses be the exception rather than the rule?
Brice Bible: OHIO is aware of this and does not actively [block] legitimate uses of P2P. We are letting unencrypted, legal traffic through and have created an exception process for those using typical illegal protocols who are inadvertently shut-off.
Slyck.com: College and university life should provide students with preparation for the rest of their adult life. Do you feel that restricting a legitimate technology is consistent with this philosophy?
Brice Bible: OHIO is only blocking illegal P2P activity. We limit this technology to ensure that our limited resources are used to advance our university’s primary mission of academics. At Ohio University, students have a great deal of autonomy and are able to make adult decisions on a wide range of issues, including legitimate P2P use.
Slyck.com: Part of Ohio University's justification for banning P2P usage is out of concern for viruses and other forms of malware. What documentation/research has Ohio University based their justification that P2P technology is more vulnerable to viruses than the World Wide Web/eMail/FTP, etc.?
Brice Bible: Many P2P protocols open ports that create security vulnerabilities. These vulnerabilities can be exploited by a variety of malware or hackers looking for an opening into a computer system. Some P2P protocols also are known to behave like spyware.
Slyck.com: Bandwidth concerns are not a new problem to ISPs. BitTorrent, Inc., the company behind the BitTorrent protocol, has worked with ISPs to significantly reduce bandwidth problems. Has Ohio University consulted with BitTorrent, Inc. to resolve their bandwidth difficulties?
Brice Bible: OHIO utilizes a variety of technology solutions to preserve bandwidth and guard against protocols that use a disproportionate amount of bandwidth. We are aware of the legitimate uses of BitTorrent, which is only one P2P [protocol] used for both legal and illegal P2P.
Slyck.com: What alternatives were considered before outright restricting P2P technology? (For example some schools dedicate a certain portion of the day to P2P usage, or limit bandwith per protocol.)
Brice Bible: OHIO has used shaping techniques to dedicate bandwidth for various purposes with some success. We also have provided a legitimate music service for students and are looking for ways to replace that service, which the company no longer offers. Before we restricted P2P traffic, we also had in place (and still do) awareness training during orientation and repeated quarterly. The University makes all students fully aware of its IT Use Policy, which prohibits copyright infringement. In addition, the University employed a “three-strikes” policy for students for some time before deciding to change to the current policy.
Slyck.com: Is this policy simply the easiest way to resolve any potential legal difficulties with the music industry?
Brice Bible: No, this is the right policy to ensure balanced use of the IT resources for all students, faculty, and staff. However, by only blocking illegal P2P activity, OHIO is permitting the free and open use of P2P for other academic and university-life activities.
Editor’s Note: The big question readers may ask, "what distinguishes an 'illegal' P2P protocol from a legitimate one?"
We followed up with Mr. Bible, and asked to differentiate between a "typical illegal" protocol and a legitimate protocol (i.e., which networks/protocols are allowed through, and which require the student to go through the exception process.)
Additionally, we asked, "... let's assume a student wishes to download a creative commons work that is freely distributed from an artist using BitTorrent. Would that student have to follow the exception process or would it be business as usual?"
Bruce Bible responded by stating that for the purposes we described, BitTorrent is "permitted and does not require an exception."
Yet oddly enough, several BitTorrent applications - including the mainline client - fall under the ban. Slyck plans additional follow-up to gain clarity on this issue.
“…Ohio University has demonstrated a serious lack of understanding of P2P technology's value and role on the Internet. Furthermore, the school has closed its doors to innovation and shirked its responsibilities as an educational institution.”
Ashwin wasn’t alone in his opinion. The EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) echoed many of Ashwin’s concerns, stating it creates “more collateral damage to academic freedom.”
Some diehard P2P fanatics thought they were smarter than Ohio University’s network administration, and believed that simply using DC++ in a LAN environment would circumvent this inconvenience. Yet LAN P2P has been curtailed as well, as Ohio University Chief Information Officer Brice Bible recently stated, “We’re just about illegal peer-to-peer free,” after the campus DC++ hub was knocked offline.
Slyck.com caught up with Ohio University CIO (Chief Information Officer) Bruce Bible, who answered our questions on the recent P2P policy. Is Ohio University being picked on unnecessarily? Perhaps their policy is simply misunderstood?
Slyck.com: It seems that Ohio University is taking a much more extreme measure compared to most other schools who have sought a more balanced approach. How does OU justify this approach?
Brice Bible: It is extremely common for universities to institute blocks on P2P file sharing. The OHIO approach is not extreme at all. We were able to refine our process to this point in the early stages of our P2P ban, and after two full weeks of this new policy, the process has not blocked one case of legal or legitimate P2P. We are detecting and only blocking known illegal P2P protocols. In the event that a legitimate P2P activity would be blocked because it is using a primarily illegal protocol, we have provided an exception process.
Slyck.com: There are numerous documented and legitimate uses for P2P technology. Why should these uses be the exception rather than the rule?
Brice Bible: OHIO is aware of this and does not actively [block] legitimate uses of P2P. We are letting unencrypted, legal traffic through and have created an exception process for those using typical illegal protocols who are inadvertently shut-off.
Slyck.com: College and university life should provide students with preparation for the rest of their adult life. Do you feel that restricting a legitimate technology is consistent with this philosophy?
Brice Bible: OHIO is only blocking illegal P2P activity. We limit this technology to ensure that our limited resources are used to advance our university’s primary mission of academics. At Ohio University, students have a great deal of autonomy and are able to make adult decisions on a wide range of issues, including legitimate P2P use.
Slyck.com: Part of Ohio University's justification for banning P2P usage is out of concern for viruses and other forms of malware. What documentation/research has Ohio University based their justification that P2P technology is more vulnerable to viruses than the World Wide Web/eMail/FTP, etc.?
Brice Bible: Many P2P protocols open ports that create security vulnerabilities. These vulnerabilities can be exploited by a variety of malware or hackers looking for an opening into a computer system. Some P2P protocols also are known to behave like spyware.
Slyck.com: Bandwidth concerns are not a new problem to ISPs. BitTorrent, Inc., the company behind the BitTorrent protocol, has worked with ISPs to significantly reduce bandwidth problems. Has Ohio University consulted with BitTorrent, Inc. to resolve their bandwidth difficulties?
Brice Bible: OHIO utilizes a variety of technology solutions to preserve bandwidth and guard against protocols that use a disproportionate amount of bandwidth. We are aware of the legitimate uses of BitTorrent, which is only one P2P [protocol] used for both legal and illegal P2P.
Slyck.com: What alternatives were considered before outright restricting P2P technology? (For example some schools dedicate a certain portion of the day to P2P usage, or limit bandwith per protocol.)
Brice Bible: OHIO has used shaping techniques to dedicate bandwidth for various purposes with some success. We also have provided a legitimate music service for students and are looking for ways to replace that service, which the company no longer offers. Before we restricted P2P traffic, we also had in place (and still do) awareness training during orientation and repeated quarterly. The University makes all students fully aware of its IT Use Policy, which prohibits copyright infringement. In addition, the University employed a “three-strikes” policy for students for some time before deciding to change to the current policy.
Slyck.com: Is this policy simply the easiest way to resolve any potential legal difficulties with the music industry?
Brice Bible: No, this is the right policy to ensure balanced use of the IT resources for all students, faculty, and staff. However, by only blocking illegal P2P activity, OHIO is permitting the free and open use of P2P for other academic and university-life activities.
Editor’s Note: The big question readers may ask, "what distinguishes an 'illegal' P2P protocol from a legitimate one?"
We followed up with Mr. Bible, and asked to differentiate between a "typical illegal" protocol and a legitimate protocol (i.e., which networks/protocols are allowed through, and which require the student to go through the exception process.)
Additionally, we asked, "... let's assume a student wishes to download a creative commons work that is freely distributed from an artist using BitTorrent. Would that student have to follow the exception process or would it be business as usual?"
Bruce Bible responded by stating that for the purposes we described, BitTorrent is "permitted and does not require an exception."
Yet oddly enough, several BitTorrent applications - including the mainline client - fall under the ban. Slyck plans additional follow-up to gain clarity on this issue.
This story is filed in these Slyck News categories
File-Sharing/P2P Related :: Copyright Issues
You can discuss this article here - 20 replies
| Astraweb |   |
| NewsDemon | |
| Thundernews | |
| Binverse | |
| Newshosting |  |
| UseNetServer | |
© 2001-2008 Slyck.com