Some thought the University was selling itself too cheaply. Faculty governance was a problem in the UCLA case, because the deal with THEN was made without consulting the faculty. Some observers saw the THEN contract as a secret and shortsighted attempt by administrators to increase university revenues at the expense of the faculty. But administrators, no doubt, thought they were engaging in something that was financially and politically advantageous for the university. They may also have worried that putting the matter to the university faculty would have jinxed the deal.
University faculties are notoriously skeptical of innovation.
Administration bashing, moreover, has always been a respectable means for faculty members to win the esteem of their faculty colleagues. In the UCLA case, it seems obvious that the university administration should have done a better job of informing the faculty of its negotiations. Since UCLA already has one of the most advanced campuses for digital learning, with websites required of every faculty member, perhaps it would have been easier there than elsewhere to secure faculty cooperation with an ambitious program in the area of distance learning. The fact that UCLA is on the cutting edge of distance technology probably contributed to worries in the area of copyright. Here, however, there seems to be a certain alarmism taking over.