[Ar-Curunir]

We didn't move them to EdX, we just made them private and available to Berkeley students only. I think this is because of some rulings stating that lecture videos have to be provided with CC if they are to be made public (OCW was sued for this).

[draker]

Thanks for the clarification. Obviously the lawsuit was seeking equal access for deaf/hard of hearing individuals but had the unintended effect of removing access for everyone (public).

It's a shame that a better solution could not be reached because it was very nice having recent course videos available (as opposed to many EdX courses which use 5-10 year old videos).

[mohsinr]

In case of this lawsuit, it achieved negative results hence: "the cure was worse than the disease".

[bogomipz]

Thats outrageous.

[harrisi]

I don't know what your role is in this, but is this simply an issue of transcribing the audio of the lectures and providing them along with the video? Is there any program set in place to have someone (assuming a software-only approach isn't satisfactory, as it might not give correct results) do this?

More directly, could one volunteer to transcribe the lectures into a CC-like format so that the lectures could be safely and legally be put up for public consumption?

[lardo]

This boogles my mind. How can you be sued for providing a free educational resource?

[pkaye]

I'm guessing under the Americans with Disabilities Act.

[pkaye]

Could they not have collaborated with Youtube which has some form of automated cc acceptable for public contents.

[noir_lord]

That's a damn shame.

[bogomipz]

I am really curios - sued for what and by whom?

[pkaye]

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/13/education/harvard-and-mit-...

[born2web]

These sort of rulings have their pros and cons... they prevent a chance for a crowd sourcing model of providing CC.

[zerr]

I guess you can distribute it through "unofficial" torrents.