The letter from the DoJ is quite threatening, and it demands (literally on the bottom line) that UCB pay restitution to the "aggrieved" (I suppose this refers t

The letter from the DoJ is quite threatening, and it demands (literally on the bottom line) that UCB pay restitution to the "aggrieved" (I suppose this refers to the two individuals specifically named as complainants?). No amount is specified, but it seems like a form of extortion: 1) complain to the DoJ about something on the Internet freely available, 2) get a check in the mail (at the expense of California taxpayers, on the other side of the country), 3) profit? However, it also states this: > UC Berkeley is not, however, required to take any action that it can demonstrate would result in a fundamental alteration in the nature of its service, program or activity or in undue financial and administrative burdens. Given the obviously prohibitive costs of transcribing all of these freely shared lectures (including describing all charts, graphs, tables, and other visual aids), it seems clear that UCB should not be required to transcribe all of the videos, nor remove them from public access. This is a travesty of justice.