ShareThis Page
News Columnists

How much information-sharing is too much?

| Tuesday, Feb. 28, 2006

For the better half of this school year, there existed a college Web site that boasted uploaded movies, television shows, music, and documentaries.

It was password-protected and independently run by an undergraduate student at Duke University. Most of the files were uploads by people who had been granted access to the student's computer -- in other words, kids who knew his IP address and the username and password to his collection.

Word of mouth kept the crowd growing, but only by a few students each week. The site was well-known enough, though, that if someone said the student's name, people usually at least recognized him as "the kid with all those TV shows online."

The site was a godsend for busy college kids: meetings, massive amounts of homework, the occasional meal and other obligations had to be prioritized before watching the latest episode of a favorite TV show. With the creation of this student's site, we could get all our work done and then make our own television schedule, winding down before bed with a downloaded version of one show or another.

But recently, worn out from a night of reading one long essay after another, I tried to open the site and found, instead of the familiar file folders, a text document that simply said, "Due to action from Judicial Affairs, this site has been shut down." I was shocked. I am a member of the Honor Council at my school -- an entity separate from, but closely associated with, the Judicial Affairs Board -- and I hadn't been aware that this student was in violation of school policy. It seemed to me that he had covered all his bases. My only guess was that the Board was questioning the legality of downloading different TV shows and movies for free, albeit private, use.

I guess I can understand their inquiry into the sharing of movies and music. I don't understand the nuances of industry sales, and don't pretend to, but I can see where production companies and artists would want to protect their rights to their work. Really, every time you want to see a movie, you have to pay money -- whether it's going to the theater or renting or buying a DVD. Likewise, each time you want to listen to an album, you buy it. But TV• Aside from the cable bill, it's a free-for-all. You can record on VHS or TiVo any show at any time. There are no restrictions.

When I was little, my mom used to record episodes of Sesame Street like they were going out of style. We still have about 20 tapes stowed away in my basement, labeled carefully: date, show, episode title. If she'd lent them out to our next door neighbors, no one would have thought anything of it. Was that stealing• Is that wrong• Now, with TiVo, it's easy to record a show and transfer it to a computer. So if a parent today recorded Sesame Street, uploaded it to a computer, and put it up on a neighborhood network for other parents to share, how is that any different• To me, it seems like advancing with technology. Keeping up with the times.

Where can we draw the line• At what point does sharing become "too much"?

I guess as cases such as this student's are resolved, we will begin to find the answers to these questions.

Megan Bode is a junior at Duke University in North Carolina.

If you are a young person who shares a passion for writing and have stories and ideas you would like to share, write to Young Voices in care of Living, Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, 503 Martindale St., Pittsburgh, PA 15212, or e-mail tribliving@tribweb.com. Pieces should be no longer than 600 words. Include your telephone number and address.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me