Knetwit: Understanding Napster from the other side
I was interviewed by the BC student newspaper for my reaction on a website that I had never heard of before – Knetwit.com. The site is targeted toward college students, enabling them to share notes from their classes. If students upload thier notes, they are provided with rewards known as “koin. I had a surprisingly unfavorable reaction to this site.
Fortunately, since its business model is entirely ad-driven, my suspicion is that it won’t survive for long. Why didn’t people learn from the dot-com bust that a purely ad-driven model won’t work in the long term? Google Ad-words is not a business strategy. Of course, I think the whole premise is a bit silly and college-centric, but that’s what they probably said about Facebook, too.
I don’t think my negative reaction comes from the fact that the information from our class might be available to others. I am more than happy to give away virtually all of my notes, lectures, and insights to students from the class for free. I am also happy for our course material to be used beyond the class. Combined with the fact that our wiki and blogposts are publicly available on the Internet, people can access a remarkable amount of our course information online without taking the course. I’d even like to start video podcasting my courses in the near future.
I think my discomfort comes from the fact that I am resentful that someone else is trying to profit from my intellectual contribution – notes from my class – that I am choosing to give away for free. I do think it’s fair use to use any of our course material for your own personal use or in you job (that’s what business schools are here for). I don’t think its OK for people to take this free content I have given to try and sell to others. Of course, if I give it away for free, why would there be any buyers? Maybe that’s why the company won’t survive.
6 comments so far
Leave a reply
You make some good points. BUT, for all the college students deep in debt and/or stressed out parents trying to fund their kids thru college, your “FREE Content” is NOT free! You and the university have already made good money off the students and the material.
For what it’s worth, I’m still paying off student loans myself, so I certainly can empathize with your position. A few responses:
1) Content does not equal education. Everyone has access to any of the books or articles we assign. Learning how to process and critically evaluate that content is another matter.
2) Many universities are using Web 2.0 tools to make content free. A great example is MITs OpenCourseware project, and more universities (BC included) are following suit. We are moving towards making some of the knowledge locked up in universities more available to those outside. This blog is an example…its my reflection (available to anyone) on the discussions that occur in my MBA class. I welcome outside readers and commenters.
3) Although much tuition increases is research/faculty related, much is not. Universities are facing increased competitive pressure to provide state of the art dorms/ exercise facilities to remain competitive. Whether this is appropriate is another debate entirely.
4) I don’t see how your comments affect the Knetwit argument. If anything, Knetwit increases the cost and decreases the value of college education. Outsiders are funding students to shortcut their own educational process, not improving knowledge or value.
I appreciate your insight.
Professors can also profit from posting their notes and lectures on Knetwit, to supplement their often inadequate incomes. Knetwit is nothing more than a knowledge management and dissemination tool, providing a perfect platform for the dissemination of information that has not made it into book form, or similar packaged and marketable forms. Moreover, student notes are their work product, not the professor’s. Knetwit also does not condone plagiarism. I suggest that critics learn something about the platform, think about its benefits, and analogize it to other types of knowledge bases. To resist this type of knowledge management and dissemination is the same as resisting the Internet itself.
“To resist this type of knowledge management and dissemination is the same as resisting the Internet itself.”
They said the same thing about Napster, too.
Two key points here:
1) In the long-run, short cuts will not create a competitive advantage for students or workers. I could write a white paper on this in an hour, but I will assume you know how the story goes. I would obviously take the side that students need to develop the skill to synthesize information quickly as learned through hard work instead of taking the short route. Eventually they too will learn too late that corner cutting catches up with everyone including the college kids who tend to think they are invincible.
2) Institutions that support these gorilla study tactics are inherently ethically questionable and therefore raise moral questions on the companies willing to advertise when them through association. What kind of company would pay for advertising on this ethically questionable website? Marlboro, Exxon Valdez, or perhaps those Viagra pop-ups? In the drive to appear concerned more on a capitalistic point of view than a moral one due to my belief in free speech (and typing), I too don’t expect the website to be profitable based on the non-receipt of ad revenues versus expenses to keep the website running with law suits in red hot pursuit.
Dont go to knetwit.com!