2. This surprised me a bit because it is similar to taking the software and copying. But in this way the software is available for the whole school on the server. Doing this and copying the software seem very similar and I want to know where the line is drawn between the two.
4. I was really hoping this one would be false, which it is. It would seem ridiculous to allow schools to buy as much software they can afford and copy the rest. That would not be fair to other schools with money.
6. I agree with this one, it is the right way the software should be used. If the students do not have access to a certain software it seems plausible that the teacher should be able to extract certain things from the software for the students use.
9. This one really confused me because mp3. com seems similar to illegal software for downloading music. The only difference here is that they offer the choice to buy the music, but they still offer free music as well. It seems that as long as the site buys the music then it can share it with others for free?
10. This one threw me off a bit too, using the media in the classroom is fine. But once the teacher puts it in an e-mail to co-workers it's not? the only difference seems to be spreading it via person or via e-mail. Could the teacher print out copies of the lesson plan with the media and personally give it to others and have that be okay?
14. Once again I am confused by this one as well. Just because the PTA bought the movies and not the children then it cannot be shown? Does this apply to a day care as well?
15. A teacher purchased the videos themselves and wanted to compile them together in another movie cannot happen. But a website can provide the clips you want to use for free? HUH?
18. A person can copy PART of a song to use in their project to present from class? But a person cannot copy entire songs from a CD? What is the difference, copying is copying.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment