3 ms·
Maybe, but the claim isn't that bogus - the students haven't given Turnitin.com rights to use their work especially for monetary gain.
by nopassrecover 18y ago
Maybe, but the claim isn't that bogus - the students haven't given Turnitin.com rights to use their work especially for monetary gain.
- tokenadult 18y agoI heard a lot from one of the students when he was first publicizing his lawsuit on another Web forum. His dad was a lawyer, and it was painfully apparent that they were constructing outlandish hypothetical harms to students in an online statement they wrote about why what Turnitin.com does was so evil, in their opinion. He finally shirked away from the online discussion on that forum after getting lots of counterargument from fully grown and very experienced lawyers who poked holes in his claims. I see the court system on both the trial level and appellate level have done the same. My impression at that time, and my impression today, is that the case was made up in an attempt to make some easy money--just the sort of lawyer behavior that should be decried by hackers everywhere.
- nopassrecover 18y agoMaybe but to me this seems like an ad hominem argument - just because he did it for money doesn't mean there isn't some value in his argument. As I mentioned in another comment, if we substitute student work for music tracks then this wouldn't even be an argument. This ruling is saying it is within my fair use rights to profit from dealing with copyrighted media abstractly, so long as I don't distribute the media itself. What I haven't seen mentioned is that when there is a match on plagiarism then the teachers do get access to the plagiarised document - so they are profiting from using and distributing copyrighted material they have no rights to.