Today, the University of California at Berkeley has deleted 20,000 college lectures from its YouTube channel. Berkeley removed the videos because of a lawsuit brought by two students from another university under the Americans with Disabilities Act.We copied all 20,000 and are making them permanently available for free via LBRY.This makes the videos freely available and discoverable by all, without reliance on any one entity to provide them (even us!).(source)
Stacy Nowak, a member of NAD, is a professor and PhD student at Gallaudet University and she is deaf.[...]Glenn Lockhart, also a member of NAD, is responsible for web, print and video communications at the Laurent Clerc National Deaf Education Center (the birth-age 12 component of Gallaudet), and he is deaf.
"However, MIT is committed to making its educational material accessible to our students and online learners who are deaf and hearing impaired," she said. "For example, in MIT OpenCourseWare, we include subtitles for all the new course videos that we publish as well as all the most popular OCW courses." (emphasis mine)
As part of the campus's ongoing effort to improve the accessibility of online content, we have determined that instead of focusing on legacy content that is 3-10 years old, much of which sees very limited use, we will work to create new public content that includes accessible features.
This move will also partially address recent findings by the Department of Justice which suggests that the YouTube and iTunesU content meet higher accessibility standards as a condition of remaining publicly available. Finally, moving our content behind authentication allows us to better protect instructor intellectual property from "pirates" who have reused content for personal profit without consent.
In many cases the requirements proposed by the department would require the university to implement extremely expensive measures to continue to make these resources available to the public for free. We believe that in a time of substantial budget deficits and shrinking state financial support, our first obligation is to use our limited resources to support our enrolled students. Therefore, we must strongly consider the unenviable option of whether to remove content from public access.
Please know that we fully intend to exhaust every available option to retain or restore free public availability of online content. It is our hope that we will find an appropriate resolution with the Department of Justice that allows us to serve the extended seeing- and hearing-impaired community and continue to provide free online content.
Let's just say I'm not inclined to put much trust in the legal analysis of someone who can't get such a basic fact straight.
The title is "20,000 Worldclass University Lectures Made Illegal, So We Irrevocably Mirrored Them." The clarification is that this is "because of a lawsuit brought by two students from another university under the Americans with Disabilities Act." Were they actually "made illegal"? I have no idea, but I do know that they certainly weren't made so "by two students" but rather by two employees.
Have you, Frenzie, found that UC Berkeley did indeed rescind public access to its hoard of lectures?
If I go out on the street, kick someone and say you made me do it, are you responsible?
The Justice Department, pursuing a complaint on the basis of the ADA, wanted the courses taken down or restricted to enrolled Berkeley students? I doubt the NAD activists will be happy with such a "resolution"...
If the Justice Department rejected this argument, what was their reasoning?
And also, what happened that led to the deaf people ("NAD activists") filing a formal complaint? I know that Americans are litigious, but even so I'd imagine they'd go for a friendly inquiry first.
What I'd say is this: [...]You disagree?
Not only does this provide vastly better accessibility, it makes the videos searchable and discoverable, it allow users to read the talks instead of/in addition to watch them and much more. The whole setup is maintained by an army of unpaid volunteers that translate and control/improve each other's translations, and has been so for a full decade. Berkeley is way behind their time.
Page created in 0.037 seconds with 27 queries.