Student Judicial Review Programs

[cyjeff]

Fine, I will take a swing.

Section VC subsection 2, paragraph "a" clearly states...

2. The following conditions may be imposed, along with a sanction, for any Charged Student found to have violated the Code of Student Conduct. Conditions include, but are not limited to:
a) Financial restitution for any loss sustained or incurred by the institution or member(s) of the University community.

There ya go. Apparently, the cost of restitution to the university, coached as a "fine" is $100 US.

This is from the Code of Student Conduct. The Code you swore to adhere to and uphold when you signed up for classes.

 

[cyjeff]

Oh, and as to your other question about the legality of the action itself, you really need to read more and whine less...

If you had BOTHERED to read your "Policy for Responsible Computing" UMBC AUP , you would have read...Please not the bolded sections...

UMBC IT-01: Policy For Responsible Computing
DRAFT DATE: -
SUBJECT: UMBC Policy for Responsible Computing
SOURCE: Office of Information Technology
GUIDELINE NUMBER: IT-01
REVIEWERS: -

DATE Finalized: September 6, 1996

PREAMBLE

This Policy sets forth the principles that govern appropriate use of computing and digital information resources. Such resources are the property of the State of Maryland, and users are bound by all pertinent University, State, and Federal policies and statutes. Access to UMBC computing resources is a privilege granted by the University. Computing policies, like other university policies, where ever possible are governed by the principle of academic freedom.

POLICY STATEMENT

UMBC provides access to computing and information resources for students, staff, faculty, and certain other users in support of UMBC's mission of teaching, research, public service, and in support of the official duties of the University. When activating an account, a user implicitly affirms that: they will abide by the broadest interpretation of the following policies; failure to follow policies may result in loss of computing privileges; UMBC may monitor computer use to protect the system; and the university may terminate the account of anyone who has been determined to use his or her access for unlawful purposes or in contravention of this policy. Computer users shall:

Act responsibly so as to ensure the integrity and ethical use of computing and information resources.
Respect the rights of others, and not threaten, harass, intimidate, or commit theft or fraud.
Respect all pertinent licenses, copyrights, contracts, and other restricted or proprietary information.
Use University computing resources and user accounts only for appropriate University activities.
Acknowledge that system administrators may examine files, mail, and printer listings for the purpose of diagnosing and correcting problems with the system.
Acknowledge the right of the University to restrict or rescind computing privileges for cause.

EXAMPLES OF ACTIVITIES SPECIFICALLY PROHIBITED

The following are some of the things that are prohibited activities; this list in not inclusive. No person may:
Intentionally corrupt, misuse, or steal software or any other computing resource.
Access information resources, data, equipment, or facilities in violation of any restriction on use.
Use University computing resources for personal or private financial gain without written authorization. Excepted from this provision is remuneration to faculty and staff for customary university related activities from: approved consulting; copy rights; patents; royalties; honoraria; reviews; etc.
Use another person's computer account.
Establish an independent computer system, except those specifically authorized for departmental use.
Knowingly, without written authorization, execute a program which may hamper normal computing activities at UMBC or elsewhere.

ACTION TO PRESERVE PUBLIC SAFETY OR INTEGRITY OF COMPUTING RESOURCES

If an University Computing Services(UCS) official reasonably believes that a user is engaged in activities which may pose an imminent threat to: 1) the health or safety of others; 2) the integrity of data; or 3) computing resources which may adversely affect system operations, the official may temporarily suspend user privileges for no more than two working days (excluding weekends and university holidays) before consulting an Administration official.
In all other cases, the UCS official shall consult the Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs and follow existing University procedures, where applicable, prior to:
Investigating alleged improper or illegal use of data, programs, or UCS equipment or resources;
Accessing data and files pertinent to the investigation; or
Limiting user privileges until the matter is resolved.
If appropriate, or required, findings from investigations may be reported to other University officials for review and action, or to State or Federal authorities.

INFORMING USER OF ACTIONS TAKEN

Unless such notification may impede an investigation, within one week University officials shall disclose in writing to an affected user that:
The user's account has been suspended, or that
The user is under investigation, and that
The user may submit evidence to those conducting the investigation, and the procedures that are applicable to the investigation.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF POLICY

By activating a computing account, a user implicitly agrees to abide by the above policy in its entirety.

Now, jump down off of your self righteous high horse and get ta studying... you have that quiz tomorrow....

 

[mb17889]

I don't mean to quarrel with anybody here. I just though the levity a couple people took with my posts to be a bit too much.

I did read my campuses policy on responsible computing. In fact, this was the document I had to "agree" to in order to access ResNet. I would note that they say that a violation results in them having the right to terminate my access (I would argue they have the right to deny me access for ANY reason not prohibited by law - let alone receiving a take down notice under the DMCA). I'm glad you brought up something substantive, but I think you miss the mark here. I think you skipped the section "ACTION TO PRESERVE PUBLIC SAFETY OR INTEGRITY OF COMPUTING RESOURCES." It doesn't say a thing about the Student Code or paying a fine for copyright violation or anything else.

My roommate didn't take $100 from me and threaten to take away my "good standing" if I didn't pay. My roommate didn't mandate that I right a 750 word essay on the DMCA.

I don't care about the $100. I care slightly about the time it took me to right the essay.
I don't think I'm whining. I am truly frustrated with the fact I was found "more likely than not" responsible for something I didn't do.

I can't prove it, but I didn't violate a copyright law. I have never downloaded anything illegally. Ever. But, again, I can't prove it. The University uses a balance of probability standard and IP addresses to find me responsible.


Tranquility: this is the point I'm trying to learn about. I don't believe I gave them permission to fine me. Furthermore, I think I should have to for them to do so. They say I broke the section of the Student Code of Conduct on Copyright Violation (which would be more or less true). But they also say the "burden of proof" is on the charging party. Well, once they charge me, it is IMPOSSIBLE for me to get out of it unless I PROVE I didn't do it (by getting somebody else to admit to the illegal download).

I feel they set up an open and shut case where they get $100 for nothing. I don't think this is "whining." I think it is somewhat unethical and immoral.

I suppose I could sue my roommate in small claims court... but I don't have any proof he actually did anything, it is simply the only alternative I thought probably seeing as that I know that I did not do anything illegal.

Under the circumstance I think the appropriate response for the university would have been to suspend my internet access for a set period. Not take $100 and still leave me legally liable to whoever actually OWNS the copyright. They don't own it, nor are they going to pay the person that does.


Alas... now it does look like I'm whining.
Am I really all that off base here?

 

[Perky]

I don't believe that is true - that I "implicitly agreed." I don't think there was any "meeting of the minds." But let's suspend this notion for a moment.

Is there any other case where you can "implicitly" agree to give somebody else a claim on your assets (with no upward bound, I might add - there is no written limit to the possible fine). If so, could you provide an example?

What is an "implicit" agreement legally?

If you have a one-night stand, you have implicitly agreed that you will provide child support to any child conceived by that union. That's an implicit agreement, just as the agreement you made when you enrolled in the university.

 

[mb17889]

If you have a one-night stand, you have implicitly agreed that you will provide child support to any child conceived by that union. That's an implicit agreement, just as the agreement you made when you enrolled in the university.

Thank you. I think I sort of understand this analogy.

But child support is a part of the Law. Paying fines to Universities for violating their "rules" is not.

What about this:
Say I enter a store that has a double yellow line painted on it. When I enter and walk around the store I cross the lines. They tell me I owe them $100 and that they have signs posted saying that entrance to the store means I agree not to cross the yellow lines and if I do I have to pay a fine they determine.

Zigner: I am honestly having trouble telling if you are being facetious about getting the lawyer bit now. Same with HomeGuru.

 

[Humusluvr]

If you have a one-night stand, you have implicitly agreed that you will provide child support to any child conceived by that union. That's an implicit agreement, just as the agreement you made when you enrolled in the university.

Or that if you park somewhere on campus, the campus police have a right to give you a ticket if you are parked illegally or without a permit.

By using the network at your campus, you agreed to abide by their terms. An illegal act was committed under your name. Therefore, you were fined.

It would be like if my roommate took my car, and parked in a handicapped spot. Should my roommate pay the fine? Yes. Whose car is the blame linked to? Mine. I must pay, or it will MY CAR that is towed.

That is why you never lend cars to roommates, and you ALWAYS log off a computer, and never give your password.

Just by attending the university, you agree to their rules. The only way you will beat this thing is to hire a lawyer (and then you'll have a fine and court costs and attorney costs) or quit school. What say you?

 

[Humusluvr]

Thank you. I think I sort of understand this analogy.

But child support is a part of the Law. Paying fines to Universities for violating their "rules" is not.

What about this:
Say I enter a store that has a double yellow line painted on it. When I enter and walk around the store I cross the lines. They tell me I owe them $100 and that they have signs posted saying that entrance to the store means I agree not to cross the yellow lines and if I do I have to pay a fine they determine.

That's not even an argument. That doesn't make sense.

 

[Perky]

Thank you. I think I sort of understand this analogy.

But child support is a part of the Law. Paying fines to Universities for violating their "rules" is not.

What about this:
Say I enter a store that has a double yellow line painted on it. When I enter and walk around the store I cross the lines. They tell me I owe them $100 and that they have signs posted saying that entrance to the store means I agree not to cross the yellow lines and if I do I have to pay a fine they determine.

If it's the kind of store that you pay a membership for the privilege of shopping there, then yes, you have to pay or they can cancel your membership. Similar to your situation.

 

[mb17889]

Ugh!

But it is not the University's purview to fine me for breaking the law (which I didn't even do, but I can't prove it). Is it? Parking laws are handled by the police (paid by taxpayers) and again, have to do with laws.

They didn't charge me with violating their rules, or I would be silent as a mouse and feel like an idiot for letting my roommate get away with a crime under my name. They (OIT) charged me with copyright violation. I think copyright violation is really immoral and I hate my name being attached to it.

About hiring a lawyer, is there any possibility of me being able to get the University to change their policy so this doesn't happen again to someone else? And would attempting to do so cost thousands of dollars?

 

[cyjeff]

I don't mean to quarrel with anybody here. I just though the levity a couple people took with my posts to be a bit too much.

Then get over your self.

You got hit with a hundred dollar fine... read through the other posts on here where people are trying to keep out of prison or to keep their children.

You just sound like a spoiled child.

I did read my campuses policy on responsible computing. In fact, this was the document I had to "agree" to in order to access ResNet.

Apparently not or I wouldn't have to read it to you.

I would note that they say that a violation results in them having the right to terminate my access (I would argue they have the right to deny me access for ANY reason not prohibited by law - let alone receiving a take down notice under the DMCA). I'm glad you brought up something substantive, but I think you miss the mark here. I think you skipped the section "ACTION TO PRESERVE PUBLIC SAFETY OR INTEGRITY OF COMPUTING RESOURCES." It doesn't say a thing about the Student Code or paying a fine for copyright violation or anything else.

Not HERE... but in the student code that references THIS section... that is why I put my quotes in the order I did...

Crap, I hate doing children's homework...

regulations and policies.

14. Improper Uses of Computers and Technology.
This rule prohibits the breach of computer security, harmful or unauthorized access, unauthorized copying or distribution of programs and/or data, unauthorized transfer of programs and/or data access denial, or the attempt to commit such acts. See the UMBC Policy for Responsible Computing.

My roommate didn't take $100 from me and threaten to take away my "good standing" if I didn't pay. My roommate didn't mandate that I right a 750 word essay on the DMCA.

I don't care about the $100. I care slightly about the time it took me to right the essay.
I don't think I'm whining. I am truly frustrated with the fact I was found "more likely than not" responsible for something I didn't do.

I can't prove it, but I didn't violate a copyright law. I have never downloaded anything illegally. Ever. But, again, I can't prove it. The University uses a balance of probability standard and IP addresses to find me responsible.

I found nothing in the code about anything resembling a "balance of probability". However, I do know a fair amount about tracing computer use.

They would have traced it to your MAC address and/or IP address... I will also guess you didn't turn in your roommate. Either way, you are lying your butt off.

Tranquility: this is the point I'm trying to learn about. I don't believe I gave them permission to fine me.

Are you really that egotistical?

Especially after I QUOTED the damn part of your student code to you?

Are you stupid, dense or so spoiled that you think no one should be able to tell you what to do?

Furthermore, I think I should have to for them to do so

Please try that on a cop sometime. Make sure the camera is rolling.

They say I broke the section of the Student Code of Conduct on Copyright Violation (which would be more or less true). But they also say the "burden of proof" is on the charging party. Well, once they charge me, it is IMPOSSIBLE for me to get out of it unless I PROVE I didn't do it (by getting somebody else to admit to the illegal download).

They traced it to your room and computer. That is kinda the proverbial "smoking gun" sparky.

I feel they set up an open and shut case where they get $100 for nothing. I don't think this is "whining." I think it is somewhat unethical and immoral.

Not at all. They could have kicked you off campus or called the police.

You could have, at any time, refused to pay the fine.

You would have then, of course, been escourted off campus. You choose to pay by remaining.

I suppose I could sue my roommate in small claims court... but I don't have any proof he actually did anything, it is simply the only alternative I thought probably seeing as that I know that I did not do anything illegal.

Let's see. It wasn't you, it wasn't your roommate... whom do you suggest next?

I really don't have the time or energy to help you meander about looking for a plausible excuse.

Under the circumstance I think the appropriate response for the university would have been to suspend my internet access for a set period. Not take $100 and still leave me legally liable to whoever actually OWNS the copyright. They don't own it, nor are they going to pay the person that does.

You are going to have to get over that.

As for the copyright, the University NEVER promised to protect you from the law. NEVER. Your fine keeps you on campus.... nothing else.

And, if you are convicted of the crime, you could still lose THAT. You can look that up yourself.

By the way, if your internet was suspended, how are you online NOW? That is it's own offense, by the way.

Alas... now it does look like I'm whining.
Am I really all that off base here?

Dear God, yes.

You are honestly surprised that the student judiciary wasn't amazed by your charm and intelligence... especially after you told EVERYONE how you could beat it. After all, you said, this isn't real or anything.

Pay your fine, and go do some community service. You really need to find out the meaning of the word "humility".

 

[mb17889]

If it's the kind of store that you pay a membership for the privilege of shopping there, then yes, you have to pay or they can cancel your membership. Similar to your situation.

EXACTLY MY POINT! But this is not what UMBC does. They say I have to pay the fine or I can't shop anywhere else! If my "good standing" is gone, isn't it really hard to attend another college? I noticed most transfer applications ask if you are in good standing.

 

[Humusluvr]

Ugh!

But it is not the University's purview to fine me for breaking the law (which I didn't even do, but I can't prove it). Is it? Parking laws are handled by the police (paid by taxpayers) and again, have to do with laws.

They didn't charge me with violating their rules, or I would be silent as a mouse and feel like an idiot for letting my roommate get away with a crime under my name. They (OIT) charged me with copyright violation. I think copyright violation is really immoral and I hate my name being attached to it.

About hiring a lawyer, is there any possibility of me being able to get the University to change their policy so this doesn't happen again to someone else? And would attempting to do so cost thousands of dollars?

I work at a major University, and have been fined by the campus police plenty, for parking violations. Spots are tight here!

I have been told that I am to NEVER let anyone use my University internet account, or I will be responsible for all activity stemming from the account. I'm sure your University made you sign that too.

Imagine if your roommate had looked at child porn. You would be sitting in jail. Or Chris Hansen could be in your dorm room.

I think you got off lightly by RIGHTFULLY being charged $100. Imagine if you had been charged PER SONG. That was why I was told not to download ANY type of music software to my University computer.

There is no way you can fight this. Sorry.

 

[cyjeff]

Ugh!

But it is not the University's purview to fine me for breaking the law (which I didn't even do, but I can't prove it). Is it? Parking laws are handled by the police (paid by taxpayers) and again, have to do with laws.

Okay moron. This is getting stupid.

I quoted where they have the "purview" to fine you for breaking the law. Further, in that section, they have the authority to ban you from campus for breaking the law.

You say you didn't do it. A jury of your peers feels differently.

I know, I know... you are innocent. Right.

They didn't charge me with violating their rules, or I would be silent as a mouse and feel like an idiot for letting my roommate get away with a crime under my name. They (OIT) charged me with copyright violation. I think copyright violation is really immoral and I hate my name being attached to it.

Did you even READ the code of conduct that I quoted?

You were found guilty. If you had evidence, you had the opportunity to present it. You declined. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, they found you guilty.

End of trial.

About hiring a lawyer, is there any possibility of me being able to get the University to change their policy so this doesn't happen again to someone else? And would attempting to do so cost thousands of dollars?

Of course not.

Why would the university open themselves up to the liability of that? They wouldn't.

You would pay thousands of dollars... in advance. And your lawyer would be laughing his/her ass off at you whenever the door closed behind you.

Because you don't have a case. It is not the University's job to make sure you represent yourself well. You were asked your side. They didn't believe you. According to the Code of Conduct, they can fine you.

Deal with it and move on.

Moron.

 

[cyjeff]

EXACTLY MY POINT! But this is not what UMBC does. They say I have to pay the fine or I can't shop anywhere else! If my "good standing" is gone, isn't it really hard to attend another college? I noticed most transfer applications ask if you are in good standing.

Did you go to class today? Have you been expelled or suspended? Then you are in good standing.

Did you read ANY of the manual?

Please tell me you are going into Poli Sci or Art History where a lack of research really won't hurt you too much.

 

[mb17889]

I found nothing in the code about anything resembling a "balance of probability".

"more likely than not responsible." Yeah. I read the whole thing (Article VI, Section 6). I'm sorry you feel like you are doing my homework. It is unfortunate you think I am spoiled. Regarding humility: I would suggest these are your problems.

I have read your points and I see some validity in them. There really isn't any need for the ad hominem attacks, is there?

I appreciate your time... and especially that you actually went out of your way to look at the policies.