• henfredemars@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    13 days ago

    Reminds me of a professor who linked a pirate copy of the text book in his syllabus and warned several times do not attempt to use these sources because doing so is a violation of copyright law! Please purchase the book!

    • philpo@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      13 days ago

      I know someone who did that with his own book. Why? The publisher fucked him over in terms of pay. He even corrected a mistake in the original one.

      • logicbomb@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        13 days ago

        As a counter to your story, I had one professor who required his students to purchase his own locally produced textbook, which had a new version with different exercises every semester or year, and I guess he made good money off of that because everybody thought he was an asshole for doing it, but he did it anyways.

        • philpo@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          13 days ago

          Yeah, happily enough that wouldn’t fly here and is actually considered a felony and surely cost someone tenure.

          Not that they won’t try to find ways around it (and surely some do), but if it’s too obvious it lands them in hot water fast.

          There was a law professor who lost both his tenure and law licence for it at the other university in the town I studied while I was there.

        • CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          12 days ago

          I had a professor do this too but the book only cost like $5 so it seemed fine compared to the loose-leaf math book I had to buy for $300

        • despoticruin@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          12 days ago

          Oh, name and shame for that shit.

          Richard Burke at Casper College does this and doesn’t even use the book. Costed over $150.

          Garbage practice that should be criminal fraud.

    • Lena@gregtech.eu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      13 days ago

      Then Brits can use TOR 😎

      If they block the publicly-accessible nodes too, they can use bridges.

    • Buelldozer@lemmy.today
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      13 days ago

      Blocking vpns is tricky in a western society because so many companies cannot function without them.

      • herrvogel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        13 days ago

        They wouldn’t block the protocol, just the most common commercial providers. That’s very easily doable.

    • Rikudou_Sage@lemmings.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      13 days ago

      Many have tried that, IMO getting the word out about VPNs even to non-technical users is important because most people still don’t know what that is. If they ever try to ban VPNs, even non-technical people will know how to use them and how to avoid the bans.

      • tyler@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        13 days ago

        Not who you’re responding to but techlinked called out that it’s illegal as well and showed the legislation text in their video. But if you’re not implementing the ID check in the first place then mentioning vpns doesn’t matter at all. I can’t even get your link to load.

        Edit: timestamp 1:50 https://youtu.be/uGJHzPHOFXM

          • tyler@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            13 days ago

            https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c1k81lj8nvpo

            According to Ofcom, platforms must not host, share or permit content encouraging use of VPNs to get around age checks.

            The government told the BBC under the Online Safety Act, it will be illegal for platforms to do this.

            Ofcom is the regulator so I’m guessing they read the law a little more closely than you. And BBC states that the government explicitly told them it would be illegal.

            • Rikudou_Sage@lemmings.worldOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              13 days ago

              Yeah, that would be the first time enforcement didn’t really bother to read the law they should be enforcing.

              So they might add it later when stuff like this becomes more common, but right now it’s not illegal, according to the law and disregarding everything else that doesn’t really have any legal hold and is really just a guideline.

            • Rhaedas@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              13 days ago

              Simple defense: “I wasn’t encouraging anything, I was just informing them.”

            • Skavau@piefed.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              13 days ago

              Reddit is super-screwed then because its full of users doing exactly that anywhere this topic comes up.

              • tyler@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                13 days ago

                I very much doubt it has anything to do with being a citizen. The law would apply to the company making the statements itself.

      • flamingos-cant (hopepunk arc)@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        13 days ago

        Section 4.37 of Ofcom’s Guidance on Highly Effective Age Assurance for Part 3 Services:

        In addition, service providers should not publish content on their service that directs or encourages UK users to circumvent the age assurance process or the access controls, for example by providing information about or links to a virtual private network (VPN) which may be used by children to circumvent the relevant processes.

          • flamingos-cant (hopepunk arc)@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            12 days ago

            Ofcom is the designated regulator and has the power of enforcement. The law doesn’t define what age verification means, only that it much be ‘highly effective’ (Section 12 (6)). It is therefore left to Ofcom to set out in its Code of Practices (Section 41 (3)) what ‘highly effective age verification’ means, which is what this guidance is. This isn’t Ofcom being nice, this is them telling you how they’re going to enforce the law.