What would you do if billions of dollars were stolen from you? Understandably upset by spreading music piracy, the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) has responded to that question by recently launching another campaign to quash the piracy of copyrighted material on college campuses across the country, which they claim has cost billions of dollars of lost revenue. While the RIAA’s concern is understandable—after all, piracy is illegal and the RIAA has every right to punish theft as they see fit—universities have no obligation to be proactive in aiding them. The Association should rethink its approach before handing down more summons.

In late February, RIAA president Cary Sherman invoked the law in a letter to the presidents of 2,000 of America’s colleges and universities, lamenting the “extensive and unacceptable” problem of piracy on campuses. His letter goes on to insist that college administrators fulfill their “reasonable role” by setting up technological barriers on networks and alerting its students of impending lawsuits.

The pressure on universities has spread to the federal government as well. Congressman Howard L. Berman (D-Calif), whose district includes much of Hollywood and America’s entertainment industry, more recently began a hearing on digital piracy in the world of higher education. Berman inveighed against universities, suggesting they “have turned a blind eye to piracy.”

Whether or not the objects of his scorn are actively supporting copyright violations, it is more than slightly disingenuous to suggest that colleges and universities account for all, or even most, of the digital piracy of music. It is a problem that occurs at every level of society and in every contingent of the listening community. Berman’s rhetoric represents the unjust application of the law to a small fraction of the population, and a shot at a target of some great convenience.

To its credit, Harvard has maintained an admirable policy with regards to music-sharing networks. Although it complies with RIAA legal requests, Harvard does not actively police its network. To invade even the digital affairs of students represents a breach of rights to privacy, and Harvard has practiced commendable restraint in that regard. An increase in such inspection would represent a threat to the trust and respect between University administrators and the student body.

Of course, the college need not be complicit in the purported crimes of its students. Regardless of pressure from the RIAA, it is not the task of a university to patrol cyberspace in search of wrongdoing. The music industry has been able to investigate (and litigate) piracy before, and it should not lean against campus administrators to take up the helm of prosecution on this count.

While it is regrettable that piracy threatens the livelihood of musicians around the world, the RIAA has adopted the wrong response strategy to this phenomenon. Litigation may persist, but the problem of lost revenues will never be relieved by virtue of such an approach. The renewed focus by the RIAA on college administrators represents a desperate maneuver and an evasion of more practical, broader solutions that embrace Internet sharing and rethink rights management issues.

People steal music, and bringing charges against a handful of arbitrary culprits will never quell the larger issue. The RIAA should respect the rights of universities as they clamor about their own.