- Air-L - lists.aoir.org

seen this ze frank thing
by Jeremy Hunsinger 13 Mar '07

13 Mar '07

http://www.zefrank.com/theshow/gallery/v/archives/whip+somebody_% 2339_s+ass/?g2_page=2 granted the lyrics are somewhat problematic to some people, but it is a great demonstration of remix culture. jeremy hunsinger wiki.tmttlt.com www.tmttlt.com () ascii ribbon campaign - against html mail /\ - against microsoft attachments http://www.stswiki.org/ sts wiki http://cfp.learning-inquiry.info/ Learning Inquiry-the journal http://transdisciplinarystudies.tmttlt.com/ Transdisciplinary Studies:the book series

1 0

Re: [Air-l] turnitin issue
by Marj Kibby 13 Mar '07

13 Mar '07

DLB The way that my University uses it, investigations are not initiated on the basis of Turnitin reports. If an assessor suspects plagiarism - on the basis of all of those methods that we have been using for decades - and finds some evidence to support that suspicion, then they can access the Turnitin report and use it to locate additional evidence. Turnitin is primarily used by students to check their citation and referencing before submission. It is not used by staff to detect plagiarism, though once there is evidence of plagiarism, it can be used to locate source documents. Marj Dr Marjorie Kibby, Senior Lecturer in Communication & Culture Faculty of Education and Arts The University of Newcastle, Callaghan NSW 2308 Australia Marj.Kibby(a)newcastle.edu.au +61 2 49216604 >>> <burkx006(a)umn.edu> 03/09/07 4:01 PM >>> The ethical problem is not quite that simple. Introna points out that the process by which Turnitin determines textual matches is unknown (the Turnitin matching algorithm is a trade secret). He suggests that the real problem is initiating, or not initiation, investigations of students based upon a methodology that is not transparent and unavailable for inspection. DLB On Mar 8 2007, Marj Kibby wrote: >There is no assumption of guilt > > Students are required to submit to Turnitin to check that their > referencing is accurate. In the same way that they are expected to use > spelling and grammar checks. > > Turnitin reports are not accessed by staff unless there is reasonable > cause to suspect that the work is plagiarised, and Turnitin reports > cannot be used as the sole evidence of plagiarism > >Marj > > > > >Dr Marjorie Kibby, >Senior Lecturer in Communication & Culture >Faculty of Education and Arts >The University of Newcastle, Callaghan NSW 2308 Australia >Marj.Kibby(a)newcastle.edu.au >+61 2 49216604 >>>> Rosanna Tarsiero <rosanna(a)gionnethics.com> 03/09/07 10:57 AM >>> >As a student myself (and online instructor), I never plagiarized a paper, >and I do know that there are persons that do. > >However, the assumption that students need to prove innocent (rather than >innocence unless otherwise proven) bothers me a great deal. > >I would refuse both submitting a paper to turnitin AND doing supplemental >work. In all honesty, I do hope that some student sooner or later ends up >suing colleges. Assuming people to be guilty unless otherwise proven >violates quite a number of human rights. > >Rosanna Tarsiero > >"Circumstances do not make a man, they reveal him." > >--James Allen > >-----Original Message----- >From: air-l-bounces(a)listserv.aoir.org >[mailto:air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of Mark Warschauer >Sent: venerdÃ¬ 9 marzo 2007 0.50 >To: air-l(a)listserv.aoir.org >Subject: Re: [Air-l] turnitin issue > >I know of no precedent or case law, but this is an issue that is >taken seriously here at UC Irvine. Students are usually given the >permission to opt out of submitting their papers through >Turnitin.com, but professors then require any students who opt out to >complete one or more alternate assignments to demonstrate their >papers were not plagiarized (and those alternatives can be quite >onerous). See examples at >http://eee.uci.edu/faculty/ccopenha/39b-student/turnitin.students.htm > >Mark Warschauer > >>Dear AOIRers, >> >>A colleague teaching another course has come across an issue with an >>undergrad who refuses to hand in her term paper because the faculty >>member's course requires that all papers also be submitted to >>Turnitin.com. >> >>The student claims that this violates her own intellectual property >>because Turnitin reportedly keeps copies for future plagiarism searches. >> >>As a supposed ICT & society "expert," my colleague came to me for advice. >>My first thought was horsefeathers. >> >>However, I am wondering if there is any precedent or case law on this in >>Canada or the US. (EU would be too different, I think.) >> >>I am not interThanks, >> Barry Wellman >> _____________________________________________________________________ >> >> Barry Wellman S.D. Clark Professor of Sociology NetLab Director >> Centre for Urban & Community Studies University of Toronto >> 455 Spadina Avenue Toronto Canada M5S 2G8 fax:+1-416-978-7162 >> wellman at chass.utoronto.ca http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman >> for fun: http://chass.utoronto.ca/oldnew/cybertimes.php >> _____________________________________________________________________ >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>The air-l(a)listserv.aoir.org mailing list >>is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >>Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >>http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> >>Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >>http://www.aoir.org/ > >_______________________________________________ >The air-l(a)listserv.aoir.org mailing list >is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > >Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >http://www.aoir.org/ > > _______________________________________________//aoir.org Subscribe, > change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > >Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >http://www.aoir.org/ > > _______________________________________________ The > air-l(a)listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of > Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or > unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > >Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >http://www.aoir.org/ -- Dan L. Burk Oppenheimer, Wolff & Donnelly Professor University of Minnesota Law School 229 19th Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55455 ********************************** voice: 612-626-8726 fax: 612-625-2011 bits: burkx006(a)umn.edu _______________________________________________ The air-l(a)listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/

2 1

CALL FOR PAPERS: Business in Virtual Worlds
by Marc Fetscherin 12 Mar '07

12 Mar '07

Sorry in case you get multiple postings CALL FOR PAPERS 3rd International Second Life Community Convention (SLCC07) August 24-26, 2007, Chicago, USA Track: *Business in Second Life* http://slcc2007.wordpress.com/ SCOPE The emergence of virtual worlds and Web 3.D change the way of doing business. Web 3.D is the synonym for Internet-based virtual worlds, where people can create own 3-D *virtual* personalities. One of the most famous of these virtual worlds is Second Life. It is undergoing an evolution similar to that of the Internet in the mid nineties and it might impact profoundly the way people cooperate, communicate, collaborate, and conduct business. The recent entering of companies such as Toyota, American Apparel, Nissan, or Adidas on Second Life is a first indication for the upcoming role of this platform for the next generation of conducting business online. The conference provides a forum for industry, academia, and government to present their latest findings in virtual worlds like Second Life and the underlying technology to support these applications. Therefore, we invite contributions (research paper, working paper, work-in progress) from a broad spectrum of disciplines including economics, management, business, marketing, finance, information systems, and computer sciences. TRACK TOPICS The track focuses on but is not limited to the following topics: - Product Testing in SL - Image, Branding, Advertising in SL - Marketing in Second Life - Selling, Cross-Selling Real and SL - Intellectual Property, Copyright, Trademarks in Second Life - Business Planning for Non-profits in SL - Promotion, Fundraising Tool and SL - Customer Integration and SL - Technology & Business, Strategy in SL - Financial Systems, Investments, Currency Exchange in SL - Emerging Media Presence in SL - Fashion Industry in Second Life - The Future of Second Life and Beyond - Second Life as a Web 3.0 Technology IMPORTANT DATES Submission Papers: June 1, 2007 Notification of Acceptance: July 1, 2007 Final Paper Submission: August 1, 2007 SUBMISSION PROCEDURES Submissions should describe original research work not submitted or published elsewhere. The author is responsible for correspondence, including the author*s name, mailing address, telephone and fax numbers, and e-mail address has to be identified. One of the authors of each paper must register and present the paper at the conference. Submitted papers will be double-blind reviewed and evaluated on significance, originality, quality, and exposition. They should clearly establish the research contribution, methodology, finding its relevance to Second Life. Accepted papers will be presented at the conference and published in the Conference Proceeding. Best papers will be published either in a book or in a Journal. There will also be *Best Paper Awards*. In order to have your proposal considered, please submit it no later than 1st June to mfetscherin(a)rollins.edu using the following guidelines. - Follow the *Guide for Authors* from the Journal of Electronic Commerce Research (www.csulb.edu/journals/jecr/s_g.htm) - You need to submit the file as a Microsoft Word-Format file - Your email should use the subject line "SLCC Business Track" LOGISTICS & TRAVEL INFORMATION We will release registration details and hotel rooming information in the coming weeks. We can share that the cost of registration will be in the range of about USD 200 and will include breakfast snacks and lunch on both Saturday and Sunday as well as some awesome musical performances and conference materials. The event is being held at the Hilton Chicago and the hotel rates with our block is $159 per night before tax. THE ROOM BLOCK IS NOT SET UP YET SO PLEASE DO NOT CALL TO BOOK A ROOM AT THIS RATE YET! We are all very excited about SLCC 2007 and will get you all details as soon as we have them (for updated information, http://slcc2007.wordpress.com) COMMITTEE Marc Fetscherin, Rollins College, USA; Christoph Lattemann, University of Potsdam, Germany; Guido Lang, University of Bern, Switzerland; Peter Lokke, CEO Crucial Armitage Inc., (Crucial Creations (SL)), New York, USA. FURTHER INFORMATION More Information and details at the conference website on http://slcc2007.wordpress.com or http://secondliferesearch.blogspot.com/ General inquiries and requests about the track: *Business in Second Life* should be sent to guido.lang(a)iwi.unibe.ch

1 0

Fwd: [cultstud-l] Wi 2(1) is here: Collaboration in Research-Creation
by Jeremy Hunsinger 12 Mar '07

12 Mar '07

Begin forwarded message: > From: Janice Leung <wonderjanice(a)yahoo.com> > Date: March 12, 2007 3:03:13 PM EDT > To: CULTSTUD-L(a)comm.umn.edu > Subject: [cultstud-l] Wi 2(1) is here: Collaboration in Research- > Creation > Reply-To: Cultural Studies <cultstud-l(a)lists.comm.umn.edu> > > Hello everyone, > > The new issue of Wi is here! Please visit us at: > http://wi-not.ca/ > > In this issue: > A Letter from our Editors-in-Chief > Barbara Crow, York University & Kim Sawchuk, Concordia University > > Rules For Collaborative Research > Yasmin Jiwani, Concordia University > > What Can I Say? > Alison Powell, Concordia University > > Daviid Gauthier: A Portrait of the Engineer as Architect of > Information > Andrea Zeffiro and Daviid Gauthier, Concordia University > > Cell Skins by Marit-Saskia Wahrendorf > Kim Sawchuk & Barbara Crow > > Territory as Interface: Design for Mobile Experiences > Michael Longford, Concordia University > > I Turn My (Digital) Camera On: Thoughts on Nuit Blanche, Toronto > Janice Leung, York University > > Editor's Choice > Top Links (Winter/Spring 2007) > > About Wi: > Wi, the journal of the Mobile Digital Commons Network (MDCN), > publishes the latest in Canadian mobilities research, encompassing > disciplines such as design, engineering, computer science, > communications and media studies. Currently focusing on the > research work of MDCN projects, Wi aims to expand its purview in > the coming months to include other national and international > scholarship, artistic productions and design research on mobility, > wireless technologies, and digital media. > > Comments/Suggestions: > Contact us at editors(a)wi-not.ca > > Best regards, > Wi-editors > > > --------------------------------- > Get your own web address. > Have a HUGE year through Yahoo! Small Business. > > _______________________________________________ > CULTSTUD-L mailing list: CULTSTUD-L(a)lists.comm.umn.edu > http://lists.comm.umn.edu/mailman/listinfo/cultstud-l jeremy hunsinger wiki.tmttlt.com www.tmttlt.com () ascii ribbon campaign - against html mail /\ - against microsoft attachments http://www.stswiki.org/ sts wiki http://cfp.learning-inquiry.info/ Learning Inquiry-the journal http://transdisciplinarystudies.tmttlt.com/ Transdisciplinary Studies:the book series

1 0

CFP: Conference on Culture, Language, and Social Practice
by Joshua P Raclaw 12 Mar '07

12 Mar '07

The conference welcomes research approaching CMC from a sociolinguistic or discourse analytic perspective, and Crispin Thurlow will be a plenary. ---------------------------------------------------- CFP: Interdisciplinary Conference on Culture, Language, and Social Practice The program in Culture, Language and Social Practice (CLASP) at the University of Colorado at Boulder is pleased to invite submissions to its first graduate student-run interdisciplinary conference. Abstracts for 20 minute papers covering topics in various areas of sociocultural linguistics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociocultural_linguistics) are invited for either the General Session or the Theme Session (see below) and are due by April 15, 2007. For both Sessions, we encourage papers that focus on the broad connections between language, culture and society and are grounded in empirical research. Examples of possible frameworks or analytic traditions for either Session may include, but are not limited to: Sociolinguistics Linguistic anthropology Narrative studies Critical discourse analysis Conversation analysis Language and identity Discourse pragmatics Computer-mediated discourse Ethnography of speaking Language and literacy Verbal art and performance Bilingualism and code-switching Language globalization Intercultural communication Language socialization *Conference Details: The conference will take place from Oct 5 - Oct 7, 2007. Our confirmed plenary speakers are Mary Bucholtz (Linguistics, UC Santa Barbara), Kathy Escamilla (Education, University of Colorado), Norma Mendoza-Denton (Anthropology, University of Arizona), and Crispin Thurlow (Communication, University of Washington). The Friday of the conference will consist of workshops held by plenary speakers and CLASP faculty, while Saturday and Sunday will be devoted to paper presentations and plenary talks. The conference website can be found at: http://www.colorado.edu/linguistics/faculty/kira_hall/clasp/conf/ *Theme Session Papers for the Theme Session should focus on a topic or issue dealing with interdisciplinary approaches to doing research on language, society and culture. Papers for consideration in the Theme Session may address issues dealing with crossing (inter)discipinary boundaries in both theoretical and applied research. Possible topics for the Theme Session might include: dialogues between linguistic anthropology and sociolinguistics; the use of feminist and queer conversation analysis; ethnographic approaches to doing critical discourse analysis; etc. *Submission Guidelines Please email a 500 word abstract to clasp.conference(a)gmail.com by April 15, 2007. The abstract should be attached in Microsoft Word (.doc) or Rich Text (.rtf) format and should contain NO information identifying the author(s) of the paper. Abstracts are evaluated on an anonymous basis. In the body of the email, please include the following information: -Name(s) of author(s) -University or other affiliation(s) of the author(s) -Email address(es) of the author(s) -Title of proposed paper -Whether you'd like to be considered for the General or Themed session -Equipment requirements -Any additional comments -3-5 keywords describing the paper Notification of acceptance or non-acceptance will be sent via email by August 1, 2007. *About CLASP More information about CLASP can be found here: http://www.colorado.edu/linguistics/faculty/kira_hall/requirements.html

1 0

Re: [Air-l] peering post
by Bram Dov Abramson 12 Mar '07

12 Mar '07

Nancy Paterson <Nancy.Paterson(a)senecac.on.ca>, 11.03.07: > Bram, you missed ENRON (the largest failure in corp history) its not > clear to what extent their engaging in bandwidth trading contributed > to their demise but it really is not relevant - ENRON was a > significant corp failure. They created the first bandwidth trade. No, I don't think it's accurate to say that Enron participated in "a commodity market in packet-based bandwidth". From what I recall Enron traded only dark and lit fibre (specifically, SONET). There was some talk of Internet bandwidth, but I don't believe Enron ever went forward with that. If you widen your ambit beyond "packet-based bandwidth", by which I assume you intend "Internet bandwidth" -- ATM and frame relay networks are packet-based, but not really relevant here -- then you could take in the sorts of things Enron was doing. Because Enron hoped that growth in demand for Internet bandwidth would help create an environment in which the sort of underlying bandwidth it was producing, selling, and buying could be commoditised, I think this would remain true to your topic -- as long as the two network layers in question were not conflated. They are different in a number of important ways, particularly geographically: "raw" bandwidth involves city pairs (point to point); Internet transit is usually one-ended. > transit IS peering - just for fee That seems an unusual use of these terms to me -- generally they are counterposed such that "peering" is a settlement-free form of transit where, as the trade-off, traffic destined only to the peer is delivered. In other words: pay me for me to deliver all traffic to the rest of the Internet, and vice versa (transit); free-peer with me to deliver all the traffic you've got that goes to my end-users, and vice versa (peering). Some providers make "paid peering" available, a sort of halfway step -- ie: pay me less than transit to deliver all traffic to my end-users, etc. See, for instance, AOL, who apparently does this (which, given the nature of paid-peering and of AOL, respectively, makes sense): <http://www.atdn.net/paid_peering.shtml>. >> Don't get me wrong, though! This is one of a number of important areas to >> look at. I question whether it is the most significant or even an >> extremely significant cost driver, relative to others, in the >> international context in which you want to operate -- I suspect that other >> cost drivers, most of them related to state-sponsored chokeholds, tend to >> be both more determinative, and highly connected, to this issue. But >> there is lots to be said and lots being said on this topic, with a number >> of interesting approaches in recent years to try and bring transparency to >> this domain. > > Thanks for the book references > I'm not looking at anti-trust but at transparency in peering agreements > - and how this may be able to happen Yes. I don't know that it is useful to cloister these from one another quite so absolutely, though. Typically transparency in bilateral commercial relations is either entered into at the behest of the parties themselves, or mandated by some third party with varying levels of suasion -- "in the shadow of", be it the shadow of a community of network operators, best practice guidelines promulgated by some formal association, shared memberships in a network facility such as a multiparty Internet exchange or, of course, state requirements. Of the latter category, early and very significant third-party attempts to provide trasparency came in the very situational context of antitrust actions, particularly in the MCI WorldCom and Sprint transactions. They helped set the stage for subsequent attempts, particularly that which has moved forward in Australia. That's why I'd think one would to include that history of antitrust enforcement as part of the story. I have some references to these in a chapter of Greg Elmer's _Critical Perspectives on the Internet_ (http://shorl.com/frifrebrudrebrine) if it is of help. cheers Bram

1 0

Re: [Air-l] turnitin issue
by Marj Kibby 11 Mar '07

11 Mar '07

Turnitin is a tool. It can be used for good or for evil. :-) Turnitin doesn't detect plagiarism. It locates text that matches text in its database. How we use that facility is up to us. Marj Dr Marjorie Kibby, Senior Lecturer in Communication & Culture Faculty of Education and Arts The University of Newcastle, Callaghan NSW 2308 Australia Marj.Kibby(a)newcastle.edu.au +61 2 49216604

8 7

peering post
by Nancy Paterson 11 Mar '07

11 Mar '07

hello all, not sure how or even if its ok to reply but here goes, Bram, you missed ENRON (the largest failure in corp history) its not clear to what extent their engaging in bandwidth trading contributed to their demise but it really is not relevant - ENRON was a significant corp failure. They created the first bandwidth trade. > UNTANGLING THE NET - > Bandwidth brokerage, arbitrage and the > creation of a commodity market in packet-based bandwidth led to > financial failures partly as a result of failing to consider the > basic interconnectedness or the internet. >Both of these propositions might need a bit more thought. >Regarding the first proposition: it's a bit hard to know what you mean by >bandwidth brokerage, arbitrage, and commodity market -- they're each >descriptors for very broad classes of phenomena. If you mean that there >were lots of buyers and sellers and that competition was based mostly on >price then sure, that happened. >But -- and especially in the domain of "packet-based bandwidth", by which >it sounds like you intend "Internet bandwidth" more specifically -- if you >mean that there were well-organised institutional or organisational >mechanisms like bandwidth trading floors for commodities trading in the >form of third-party transactions by people who neither produce nor consume >Internet bandwidth, then this might need some more digging. Band-X (that >piece is now part of Arbinet) and Invisible Hand Networks represent two >pieces of that puzzle. But they hardly represent a very significant part >of any Internet bandwidth market. transit IS peering - just for fee > Internet peering agreements provide international networks the > ability to function. >I don't know. Peering has been really important, and is still kind of >important. But surely most bilateral BGP relationships are ones of >transit, not peering -- particularly at the international level. >Quantifying the extent to which this is so would be a valuable >contribution, I think. >I suspect that that has much more to do with financial failures, than an >inability to understand the Internet's interconnectedness. Fred >Goldstein's and Daniel Reingold's books are two really nice accounts of >that story. I understand Om Malik's is, too, but I have not read it and >can't say. In any case, there are quite a few. > This research proposes to examine peering agreements over x# > of years and to look at the potential for the development of > transparency in peering agreements. >Don't get me wrong, though! This is one of a number of important areas to >look at. I question whether it is the most significant or even an >extremely significant cost driver, relative to others, in the >international context in which you want to operate -- I suspect that other >cost drivers, most of them related to state-sponsored chokeholds, tend to >be both more determinative, and highly connected, to this issue. But >there is lots to be said and lots being said on this topic, with a number >of interesting approaches in recent years to try and bring transparency to >this domain. Thanks for the book references I'm not looking at anti-trust but at transparency in peering agreements - and how this may be able to happen >Apart from the well-known efforts in the context of antitrust actions in >the U.S. and in Europe and, of course, the EuISPA/APEC/ITU meme, see >particularly actions at the federal level in Australia. In the Canadian >context, the CRTC's Telecom Monitoring reports have addressed this issue >to a very limited extent, particularly in years past (the first 3 issues), >but some very important efforts in BC (BCNET's Transit Exchange model) and >Alberta (via SuperNet) speak directly to this issue, and probably due in a >domestic context -- as do multiple U.S. efforts at the state level, I >suspect -- something similar to what I understand the World Bank has been >trying to put together around the EASSy project. Nancy Paterson

1 0

Re: [Air-l] turnitin issue [and privacy+security of students]
by Miraj Khaled 11 Mar '07

11 Mar '07

great! i guess portraying me as a 'conspiracy theorist' would trivialize the issue i am speaking for. actually, if you are attending the AOIR conference this fall, you can ask my instructors that question. i know life is full of risk. it is very convenient to say that atop the "ivory towers'. i am sure people would be happy to risk going on a rendition flight to cuba/poland than taking a course on cyberlaw & copyright. i rest my case. miraj --- air-l-request(a)listserv.aoir.org wrote: Message: 2 Date: 09 Mar 2007 15:26:06 -0600 From: burkx006(a)umn.edu Subject: Re: [Air-l] turnitin issue [and privacy+security of students] To: air-l(a)listserv.aoir.org On Mar 9 2007, Miraj Khaled wrote: > >well, are we sure it is only 'hash' of the papers? No. But, then, we aren't certain that your instructors aren't secretly working for the CIA, either. Life is full of risks. You have to prioritize. DLB -- Dan L. Burk Oppenheimer, Wolff & Donnelly Professor University of Minnesota Law School 229 19th Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55455 ********************************** voice: 612-626-8726 fax: 612-625-2011 bits: burkx006(a)umn.edu ____________________________________________________________________________________ Don't pick lemons. See all the new 2007 cars at Yahoo! Autos. http://autos.yahoo.com/new_cars.html

1 0

what is the turnitin copyright claim?
by Philip N Howard 11 Mar '07

11 Mar '07

At UW, we've been advised that undergraduates control the copyright on anything they produce through coursework, but that the university controls the copyright on anything that graduate students produce through coursework. I don't know who uses turnitin here, but it is probably reasonable to offer an opt-out option to undergraduates. Since there are a growing number of exaggerated copyright claims, I looked for Turnitin's copyright policy. This was all I found http://www.turnitin.com/static/usage.html http://www.turnitin.com/static/pdf/datasheet_ip.pdf It seems like a media relations pamphlet, but I did not see that they were claiming exclusive copyright over the materials that undergraduates upload. In fact they are claiming the opposite, a "non-exclusive, royalty-free, perpetual, world-wide, irrevocable license to reproduce, transmit, display, disclose, and otherwise use your Communications on the Site or elsewhere for our business purposes." So this comes back to the ethics...I don't think we should force students to give up their exclusive copyright. I also agree with Dan, we don't know until it's litigated. Phil Philip N. Howard Assistant Professor Department of Communication University of Washington

3 2