Our recommendation is that, as it stands, it raises the prospect of it being interpreted a contrario. Because it specifies “for educational purposes”, you can download based on what would be an implied licence. If it says “print”, you can print. It does raise the prospect that outside the educational institutions, you could not do it.
For example, I'm a law professor by training. At work, I can print, but when I go home, I can't. Indeed, I think we would want to make sure it's protected. People would say it's research and so on, so maybe it's protected. I'm just concerned about the way in which it could be interpreted. That's the essence of our objection here.