Parents and teachers at Whittier Arts Magnet School in Berkeley, California, angrily recall the day last September when they found out they were considered software pirates. Clamping down on unlicensed software, the Berkeley Unified School District ordered roughly 15 of 20 titles on the school's machines erased.
Part of what hurt was that the software removed had been copied - an effort to give a bare-bones computer program resources it would have lacked otherwise.
"If we hadn't taken the liberty with those programs, we would never have been able to use them and parents would never have been able to use them," said Rupert Gopez, in charge of the school's computer resources.
Arts Magnet's experience showcases how schools deal with a little-discussed legal and ethical dilemma: In an era when computer technology is becoming a centerpiece of the nation's classrooms, teachers and staff find themselves acting as intellectual property cops.
Many large districts have launched campaigns to address software piracy. Some feature straightforward education on the issues. Others impose aggressive, and unloved, measures to protect copyrighted software.
The efforts come at a time when software companies say they're unconcerned about the issue. Big educational software makers such as Davidson, Computer Curriculum Corp., and Broderbund say schools generally get high grades for preventing piracy.
However, the industry's own chief piracy enforcer - the Software Publishers Association - is looking on with a furrowed brow. The group says piracy in schools constitutes a "very serious," but unquantifiable problem in the US$800 million K-12 education software market.
"The awareness is now out there, but there's still a tremendous amount of copying going on," said Sue Kamp, director of education marketing for the association. "There's a righteousness to it in that, 'Hey, we're doing it for the good of kids, so it's OK,' or because of lack of funds. ... Or 'the superintendent says we won't get caught, so well go ahead and do it anyway.'"
As part of its effort, the software association threatens to audit school districts it suspects of widespread piracy.
One such audit, in May 1996, found the Niles Township Community District in north suburban Chicago out of compliance. The penalty, in lieu of an embarrassing and potentially costly lawsuit: Administrators were required to write a letter testifying to the terrors of being caught up in a piracy audit.
Some administrators say schools have no excuse not to pay for software given the discounts offered by makers. In some cases, schools and teachers can buy programs at 10 percent of the market rate. Working with the industry, the California Technology Assistance Project, a state agency, makes software available to schools as inexpensively as $15 a copy. Microsoft Office, normally a $600 suite, costs $40 through the program if schools buy multiple copies.
Microsoft will also sell individual shrink-wrapped copies of Office to schools for $159. But Jackie Carriker, group manager for Microsoft's Education Customer Unit, said many schools don't know about the education pricing and that may be one reason they continue to use unlicensed software.
"They don't believe they can afford the pricing that is out there," she said. "They think the only way around it is to copy or borrow or share, or whatever."
In any case, the problem is not new with the advent of computers in the classroom, nor is it limited to software, said Frank Wallace, education technology consultant with the California Department of Education. For instance, Wallace said, schools need to get religion about protecting copyrights for music, videotapes, and TV programs that are brought into the classroom.
Some districts, like those in Boston, Los Angeles, and Seattle, say they have conquered the illicit software problem. Others say they simply don't have the resources to deal with the issue. Among those that do, Berkeley is hardly the only district where software has become a touchy subject.
Next week, for example, the San Francisco Unified School District will send a series of memos to teachers reiterating warnings against software piracy.
"At the risk of getting esoteric, we're in the business of teaching kids the right thing to do and it starts with us," said Ruben Bohuchot, chief technology officer for the San Francisco district. "You'd hate to see us get audited and have the message get back to the kids."
Two years ago, public schools in Cambridge, Massachusetts, began locking hard drives, meaning neither students nor teachers could load or change software. The move was intended primarily to deter students from downloading unauthorized game or trying to hack the district's network. But the locking was also an antipiracy measure. Parents and teachers still complain that they have little control over their classroom computers, said Joanne Krepelka, coordinator of educational technology for the district.
Krepelka conceded that locking the hard drives was a severe measure, but one necessary to protect software copyrights. She suggested, however, that software firms and their diverse licensing demands are part of the problem. Some companies offer licenses that might cover individual workstations only; others will write agreements for entire classrooms, districts, or networks.
"Every single one of these companies has a different little twist," she said. "If you're not conscientious, people start to throw caution to the wind" and load unlicensed programs.
Back in Berkeley, the other shoe still hasn't dropped in the software crackdown. Next fall, phase two of the program kicks in: In addition to the current warnings, the district will begin a search-and-destroy mission to cleanse hard drives of illegally copied software.
"We're a lot better than a lot of districts out there," said Paul Monroe, BUSD's technology manager. "We're at least going to do something about it."
Indeed, the Berkeley case also illustrates one of the unintended consequences of wiring schools: Administrators budget to buy hardware, but sometimes forget to factor in the costs for software or software licenses. Gopez said Berkeley Arts Magnet "maxed out" its technology budget upgrading hardware and now cannot afford to replace the programs stripped by the district.
Shirley Bellamy, director of the Center for Innovative Technology and Training for the District of Columbia Public Schools, said the district has held off buying new computers in some cases, because it knows it cannot afford software, too. "Right now, money's kind of tight," she said. "We don't buy computers unless we can purchase software."
