[B] 奈良教育大学附属小学校　強制的な出向人事を巡る裁判が9月に始まる

日刊ベリタ
4 weeks 1 day ago
今年１月、奈良教育大学附属小学校（以下、附属小）の授業内容の一部が、文科省が告示する教育課程の基準である学習指導要領に沿っていないとする報道がされた。昨年５月、奈良県教育委員会が、附属小の母体である奈良教育大学に対して、「附属小の教育課程に法令違反を含む不適切な事案がある」と指摘し、これを受けて、同大学は附属小の教育課程を調べるために調査委員会を組織していた。上記の報道は、今年１月、同委員会の調査によって教育課程の一部に不適切事項があったことを示す報告書が公表されると同時に大々的に取り上げられたもので、附属小の教育課程が「不適切」「法令違反」などと断定して世間に広められた。しかし、この報道のもととなった教育課程の調査結果やそれに付随する大学側の対応については、教育界や関係者などから多くの批判の声が上がっている。（小栗俊也）
日刊ベリタ

[B] 那覇地裁で米兵による少女誘拐暴行事件の被害少女に尋問約５時間

日刊ベリタ
4 weeks 1 day ago
２３日に那覇地裁であった米兵による少女誘拐暴行事件の第２回公判で、被害少女に対する尋問が約５時間に及んだことを沖縄タイムスが２９日伝えた。同紙によると、被害を受けた時の反応、動作を尋ねられるたびに少女は言葉に詰まり、苦しそうな息遣いが遮蔽板を通して傍聴席に伝わったという。（大野和興）
日刊ベリタ

Copyright Is Not a Tool to Silence Critics of Religious Education

EFF update
4 weeks 1 day ago

Copyright law is not a tool to punish or silence critics. This is a principle so fundamental that it is the ur-example of fair use, which typically allows copying another’s creative work when necessary for criticism. But sometimes, unscrupulous rightsholders misuse copyright law to bully critics into silence by filing meritless lawsuits, threatening potentially enormous personal liability unless they cease speaking out. That’s why EFF is defending Zachary Parrish, a parent in Indiana, against a copyright infringement suit by LifeWise, Inc.

LifeWise produces controversial “released time” religious education programs for public elementary school students during school hours. After encountering the program at his daughter’s public school, Mr. Parrish co-founded “Parents Against LifeWise,” a group that strives to educate and warn others about the harms they believe LifeWise’s programs cause. To help other parents make fully informed decisions about signing their children up for a LifeWise program, Mr. Parrish obtained a copy of LifeWise’s elementary school curriculum—which the organization kept secret from everyone except instructors and enrolled students—and posted it to the Parents Against LifeWise website. LifeWise sent a copyright takedown to the website’s hosting provider to get the curriculum taken down, and followed up with an infringement lawsuit against Mr. Parrish.

EFF filed a motion to dismiss LifeWise’s baseless attempt to silence Mr. Parrish. As we explained to the court, Mr. Parrish’s posting of the curriculum was a paradigmatic example of fair use, an important doctrine that allows critics like Mr. Parrish to comment on, criticize, and educate others on the contents of a copyrighted work. LifeWise’s own legal complaint shows why Mr. Parrish’s use was fair: “his goal was to gather information and internal documents with the hope of publishing information online which might harm LifeWise’s reputation and galvanize parents to oppose local LifeWise Academy chapters in their communities.” This is a mission of public advocacy and education that copyright law protects. In addition, Mr. Parrish’s purpose was noncommercial: far from seeking to replace or compete with LifeWise, he posted the curriculum to encourage others to think carefully before signing their children up for the program. And posting the curriculum doesn’t harm LifeWise—at least not in any way that copyright law was meant to address. Just like copyright doesn’t stop a film critic from using scenes from a movie as part of a devastating review, it doesn’t stop a concerned parent from educating other parents about a controversial religious school program by showing them the actual content of that program.

Early dismissals in copyright cases against fair users are crucial. Because, although fair use protects lots of important free expression like the commentary and advocacy of Mr. Parrish, it can be ruinously expensive and chilling to fight for those protections. The high cost of civil discovery and the risk of astronomical statutory damages—which reach as high as $150,000 per work in certain cases—can lead would-be fair users to self-censor for fear of invasive legal process and financial ruin.

Early dismissal helps prevent copyright holders from using the threat of expensive, risky lawsuits to silence critics and control public conversations about their works. It also sends a message to others that their right to free expression doesn’t depend on having enough money to defend it in court or having access to help from organizations like EFF. While we are happy to help, we would be even happier if no one needed our help for a problem like this ever again.

When society loses access to critical commentary and the public dialogue it enables, we all suffer. That’s why it is so important that courts prevent copyright law from being used to silence criticism and commentary. We hope the court will do so here, and dismiss LifeWise’s baseless complaint against Mr. Parrish.

Mitch Stoltz