I seriously did not imagine that state law would become an inhibition to free online education.
I understand the spirit of the law in regards to educational programs that the users pay for, but the registration/approval process doesn't make sense when the content is free, because then the student doesn't require "consumer protection" in the typical economic sense as cited in the article.
The natural extension of this law is that educational content in general would need to be approved by the state to be used by its residents. If Stanford needs to pay to have free video lectures and exercises available to students, shouldn't Google then need to pay for Crash Course to be available? And what about the courses Yale/others put on YouTube?
