Supreme Court sides with student in case over textbooks • Hacker News Board

Re: Supreme Court sides with student in case over textbooks

#121

Post by WildUtah » Tue, Mar 19, 2013, 7:57 PM UTC

andrewpi wrote: post #31

SCOTUSblog analysis: http://www.scotusblog.com/2013/03/opinion-analysis-justices-...

The older case Costco v. Omega was decided in an unsigned, unexplained per curiam decision. No one outside the court knows which four were on each side.

Breyer won six votes for his strong pro-competition, pro-market, IP moderate position.

Remember that in Eldred v. Ashcroft (q.v.) Breyer wrote one of two vigorous dissents against the essentially permanent copyright terms now in force. Former justice Stevens was the other.

Stevens was also joined by Breyer in the split decision in Bilsky where they won four votes (with Ginsburg and Sotomayor) for serious restrictions on patents for software and business methods and possibly total exclusion from patentability for those arts.

In short, Stevens was a great loss and Breyer is still a national treasure. Let's hope we get more like them and fewer like Kennedy, who always seems to be on the wrong side of IP cases. (Alito, Roberts, and Scalia are very bad, too, but haven't been as consistent trying to destroy our industry as Kennedy.)

Re: Supreme Court sides with student in case over textbooks

#122

Post by pflats » Tue, Mar 19, 2013, 8:01 PM UTC

I'm not a huge international policy wonk, but I don't get how these suits (this one and Omega vs. Costco) reconcile with the rules of the WTO (of which the US and Thailand are charter members).

Doesn't the National Treatment Policy state that imported goods shouldn't be treated differently than locally-produced ones? And doesn't restricting the first-sale doctrine on imported good break that very rule?

I'd love for someone to explain how this relates to international law that we're supposed to be following. I'm always curious abou this stuff, and I can't find anything good in my Google searches.

(I realize that the WTO is rather toothless, but still.)

Re: Supreme Court sides with student in case over textbooks

#123

Post by WildUtah » Tue, Mar 19, 2013, 8:02 PM UTC

nitrogen wrote: post #83

It's interesting that the Omega watch case had a 4-4 tie in the SC while this decision was 6-3. Does this mean that Costco can start importing cheap watches again? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omega_S.A._v._Costco_Wholesale...

Costco won in district court on remand. The theory was that even if it was infringing copyright, using copyright to block physical goods was an abuse of copyright.

So Costco still won in the end.

Omega was appealing the decision last I heard.

Cr_ppy Omega watches are overpriced anyway.

Re: Supreme Court sides with student in case over textbooks

#124

Post by entropy_ » Tue, Mar 19, 2013, 8:02 PM UTC

SEMW wrote: post #108

saraid216 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When I was in university, over in Europe, a long time ago, on the first day of lectures the professors would wheel in a cart of textbooks, saying these are suitable texts, go and pick the one that suits you best. o.O Seriously? How have I never heard that this happens? That's ridiculously sane.

As someone who goes to uni in Europe (the UK), I've never had anyone wheel in a an actual cart of textbooks, but nor have I ever had a lecturer proclaim only a single textbook is acceptable. Usually they give a list of 5-10, with a few of them being recommended. Even where they clearly prefer some particular textbook, they'll still name a few alternatives. If a lecturer ever did say only a single textbook was allowed…

Well from my experience at an American university(though not in the US, so this may not apply). Some professors will assign graded homework problems by simply referencing the page/problem number of problems to solve. If you have a different book or edition then you simply cannot do the exercises.

Also, as for requiring the newest edition, it's because bookshops may not have older editions in stock, so you cannot require an older edition. Therefore, the only way to make sure all students can get the same edition of a textbook you have to ask for the newest one.

Yes, it sucks. The solution is to scan the problems you want to assign and make them available as PDFs to students, but most professors are too lazy or don't have time for this.

Re: Supreme Court sides with student in case over textbooks

#125

Post by gwright » Tue, Mar 19, 2013, 8:06 PM UTC

pdonis wrote: post #113

gwright wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand the disdain that Citizens United gets. It is a pretty clear cut application of 1st Amendment principles. People don't lose their 1st amendment rights simply because they are organized as a corporation. The law can't favor free speech for some corporations/groups (New York Times, MSNBC, UAW, etc.) but not others (non-profit groups like Citizens United). On top of this, the speech involved was politi…

People don't lose their 1st amendment rights simply because they are organized as a corporation. This assumes that any speech or political contribution by a corporation is automatically assented to by everyone who is associated with the corporation. Ask the employees or shareholders of a large corporation how many of them agree with using the corporation's money for the campaign contributions it makes. If people want…

Freedom of association. You are free to invest or not invest in a corporation. You can be a customer or not. You can be an employee or not.

The idea that a group of people (organized as a church, club, corporation, partnership, union, political party, non-profit, etc.) can only 'speak' as a group by getting every 'member' to explicitly sign a document for each and every instance of 'speech' or expenditure of money is entirely unworkable.

Re: Supreme Court sides with student in case over textbooks

#126

Post by CamperBob2 » Tue, Mar 19, 2013, 8:06 PM UTC

pdonis wrote: post #113

gwright wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand the disdain that Citizens United gets. It is a pretty clear cut application of 1st Amendment principles. People don't lose their 1st amendment rights simply because they are organized as a corporation. The law can't favor free speech for some corporations/groups (New York Times, MSNBC, UAW, etc.) but not others (non-profit groups like Citizens United). On top of this, the speech involved was politi…

People don't lose their 1st amendment rights simply because they are organized as a corporation. This assumes that any speech or political contribution by a corporation is automatically assented to by everyone who is associated with the corporation. Ask the employees or shareholders of a large corporation how many of them agree with using the corporation's money for the campaign contributions it makes. If people want…

I agree with this; I don't see why the New York Times should get any special privileges because it's a "journalistic organization". But that just means everybody should have to abide by the same rules; it doesn't mean the rules should allow corporations to do things with company money that many if not most of their employees and shareholders would not agree with, just because those things happen to be "speech".

But the New York Times and Citizens United are both corporate entities. Few would question the NYT's right to publish editorials that promote specific political opinions and candidates, correct? What can you say about the NYT that you can't say about CU?

If they want to express opinions as a large group, they can all sign the same letter or petition. Using company money to do things that only some of the company's owners or employees would assent to is not "free speech"; it's misuse of company money. That used to be called "embezzlement", not free speech.

Your argument has a trivial workaround, which would have been put into widespread practice if the Citizens United decision had gone the other way. Every corporation in America would have added a line to its charter similar to whatever line in the NYT charter causes it to be considered an editorial publisher. If necessary, a similar line would have been added to every employment agreement signed by every corporate employee upon being hired.

Re: Supreme Court sides with student in case over textbooks

#127

Post by WildUtah » Tue, Mar 19, 2013, 8:07 PM UTC

dougmccune wrote: post #34

throwaway1979 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not necessarily. I was from a modest family in Asia and went to high school (actually, I skipped most of high school as I studied on my own). I remember paying a few thousand rupees for a textbook. Most of these were printed on low quality paper and had soft or generic covers. I never thought that these books were cheap ... until I moved to North America. I noticed many books for my undergad costed over a hundred dol…

I'm involved in academic publishing, and this is exactly what will happen. Publishers will simply stop selling the cheaper international versions. Those cheaper prices aren't sustainable, they only exist because the investment in the book is already made up for by the US/first world market. The cheap international pricing is subsidized by the more expensive markets and the international sales don't (historically) can…

That's ideal.

What we need is enough schools and teachers with an incentive to contribute to a public domain textbook system. Each contributor should write a good presentation of a specialty or a favorite subject. Then the whole book will be among the best textbooks possible.

And the textbook cartel will collapse in the USA and the less developed world while students have better books for free.

Re: Supreme Court sides with student in case over textbooks

#128

Post by PeterisP » Tue, Mar 19, 2013, 8:09 PM UTC

thedufer wrote: post #62

HarryHirsch wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Publishers are merely exploiting the highly school-like nature of university education in the US. When I was in university, over in Europe, a long time ago, on the first day of lectures the professors would wheel in a cart of textbooks, saying these are suitable texts, go and pick the one that suits you best. But in the US, students demand that their education is like high school, with a set text and all, and if the…

> students demand What? I've never heard this particular demand (and I just graduated from a US college). Sure, students might complain about having the wrong edition - but only when lecturers assign work by page number, so that it becomes impossible to do it with the wrong edition. Do you have any evidence that this is the students' fault?

Well, that's the whole point - you never, ever assign anything "by page number" since you don't rely on any specific textbook being used or available.

You teach a specific topic; and supplementary reading and extra information on that topic will be available in any reasonable textbook of that subject. You might recommend a textbook that, in your opinion, explains it clearest; but in a few of my college years I managed without reading a single textbook as the lectures + prof's online notes + my work experience covered almost everything, and the rest could be looked up online or simply asked.

Re: Supreme Court sides with student in case over textbooks

#129

Post by SEMW » Tue, Mar 19, 2013, 8:13 PM UTC

saraid216 wrote: post #120

SEMW wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who goes to uni in Europe (the UK), I've never had anyone wheel in a an actual cart of textbooks, but nor have I ever had a lecturer proclaim only a single textbook is acceptable. Usually they give a list of 5-10, with a few of them being recommended. Even where they clearly prefer some particular textbook, they'll still name a few alternatives. If a lecturer ever did say only a single textbook was allowed…

As I've been able to tell, a lot of the fiat declarations by lecturers actually come from hard experience with students trying to rules lawyer their way to good marks. If they declare with absolute finality This Book at This Edition on This Page, then students don't have as much wiggle room for whining. They can't say the material wasn't covered because, "Yes, actually, it was on page 149 right here." Stuff like that…

From my perspective, that seems pretty bizarre. Here, sticking to a single text-book (or the lecture notes) would probably ensure you didn't get a First - for that you're expected to do wider research & reading on your own. The lectures aren't supposed to be comprehensive, they're intended to give you a feel for the subject and a framework to go do your own research. And that's not incompatible with CamperBob2's wanting professional curation of resources.

(Admittedly this is for a humanities subject - it's be slightly different for less research-orientated subjects like maths - but even there, having a question set that you hadn't seen before is surely what you expect, not something to complain about. Otherwise it's testing you on memory recall rather than mathematical ability).

Re: Supreme Court sides with student in case over textbooks

#130

Post by PeterisP » Tue, Mar 19, 2013, 8:14 PM UTC

saraid216 wrote: post #120

SEMW wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who goes to uni in Europe (the UK), I've never had anyone wheel in a an actual cart of textbooks, but nor have I ever had a lecturer proclaim only a single textbook is acceptable. Usually they give a list of 5-10, with a few of them being recommended. Even where they clearly prefer some particular textbook, they'll still name a few alternatives. If a lecturer ever did say only a single textbook was allowed…

As I've been able to tell, a lot of the fiat declarations by lecturers actually come from hard experience with students trying to rules lawyer their way to good marks. If they declare with absolute finality This Book at This Edition on This Page, then students don't have as much wiggle room for whining. They can't say the material wasn't covered because, "Yes, actually, it was on page 149 right here." Stuff like that…

What could possibly be "hard experience" with rules lawyering? Just say no.

At least here if a student believes to be seriously wronged, he can take a re-exam in front of a committee with other prof's, not involving the teacher; and prove that his knowledge is really superior to the grade given, and this has happened; but it definitely isn't the easy way out - it works in cases of malice or prejudice, but not for laziness or 'optimization'.