Not every author - note the situation of journalists, who generally write
for hire/sell their souls in droit d'auteur countries as they do in the
lands of copyright.
Chris
Chris Zielinski
Director, Information Waystations and Staging Posts Network
Currently External Relations Officer, HTP/WHO
Avenue Appia, CH-1211, Geneva, Switzerland
Tel: 004122-7914435 Mobile: 0044797-10-45354
e-mail: zielinskic_at_who.int and informania_at_supanet.com
web site:
http://www.iwsp.org
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bernard Lang" <Bernard.Lang_at_INRIA.FR>
To: <AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG>
Sent: Monday, January 06, 2003 6:25 PM
Subject: Re: Distance Learning and Copyright
> On Mon, Jan 06, 2003 at 03:14:52PM -0000, Charles Oppenheim wrote:
> > The UK Higher Education Funding Councils and UUK (representing
> > vice-chancellors/principals/rectors of UK Universities) is about to
publish
> > guidelines on copyright ownership in e-learning materials. These include
> > recommendations for contractual clauses of employment between staff and
> > universities on this very topic.
> >
> > I have to say, though, that I find it hard to see what the problem is
here.
> > The doctrine of work for hire in the USA (as I understand it) and
copyright
> > law in the UK is that if someone ids in paid employment to do a
particular
> > task, then the employer owns the copyright in what is being created.
This
> > seems to me to be equitable.
>
> not to me ... and it is against the law here.
>
> A creative piece of work belongs primarily to the author ... who then
> decides what becomes of it. That is droit d'auteurs ... but
> copyright always denied authors' rights. Under copyright regime, you
> can sell your soul, if it is marketable.
>
> Bernard
>
>
> What is more contentious is if the employer
> > sells the distance learning material and makes a lot of money from it,
then
> > the member(s) of staff involved in its creation should get some payment
> > above their salaries.
> >
> > Charles
> >
> > Professor Charles Oppenheim
> > Department of Information Science
> > Loughborough University
> > Loughborough
> > Leics LE11 3TU
> > 01509-223065
> > (fax) 01509-223053
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Stevan Harnad" <harnad_at_ecs.soton.ac.uk>
> > To: <AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG>
> > Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 9:02 PM
> > Subject: Distance Learning and Copyright
> >
> >
> > > [Inquiry with identifying information removed]:
> > >
> > > > I'm contacting you because of your tremendous contribution in the
area
> > > > of free-for-use open access of research articles.
> > > >
> > > > My current concern lies in the area of teaching material and
distance
> > > > learning.
> > >
> > > I'll do my best (but my only area of quasi-expertise is refereed
> > > research papers, before and after peer review...)
> > >
> > > > I currently teach [subject deleted] courses for which I have either
> > > > prepared or am about to prepare lecture notes.
> > > >
> > > > My university has a policy of claiming copyright for all teaching
> > materials,
> > > > recognising that copyright for books (textbooks or otherwise)
belongs
> > > > to the author, except where the material was prepared for distance
> > > > learning.
> > > >
> > > > My situation is this:
> > > >
> > > > I currently use very little written teaching material, a few
overheads,
> > > > a few notes to myself some talking and a lot of questions.
> > > >
> > > > Like many other institutions, mine is positioning itself in the
distance
> > > > learning market, and very soon the courses I teach may be offered as
> > > > distance learning courses.
> > > >
> > > > In order to teach these courses I will be required to provide
extensive
> > > > written teaching material, over which the university will claim
> > > > copyright
> > > >
> > > > I am not happy with this situation, and find it hard to believe
other
> > > > academics can just accept this. My concerns centre round the fact
that
> > > > in writing this material I would not simply summarise existing
> > > > knowledge, but put into my own ideas and thoughts. As such I would
not
> > > > be happy to relinquish copyright.
> > > >
> > > > My questions for you are:
> > > > Do you know of anyone working on, concerned about, discussing this
> > > > issue?
> > >
> > > Yes, there are many people. One of the most active and able is called
> > > (suitably) Hal Abelson, at MIT: hal_at_mit.edu
> > > See his video at http://mit.edu/mitworld/content/libraries/scdw.html
> > > Boyle is good too!
> > >
> > > And Peter Suber of FOS is also very knowledgeable in this.
> > > http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/
> > >
> > > > Most of the material I've read seems to be either: non-UK; assuming
> > > > academics will accept this; taking the view of the institutions.
> > > > I know you have initiated Skywriting courses and wonder what your
own
> > > > thoughts are on these issues
> > >
> > > On the one hand, I've always drawn a clear line between
author-give-away
> > > work (for which refereed-research papers are the paradigmatic case)
> > > and author-non-give-away work (such as most books and textbooks), for
> > > which authors want royalties and/or fees.
> > > http://cogprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/archive/00001700/
> > >
> > > I know that it takes a lot of time and effort to write a textbook --
> > > time and effort many instructors would not invest if there were no
> > prospect
> > > of royalties or fees. The university never tried to lay claim to their
> > > paper-textbook copyright, nor did they claim a share in any royalties
> > > because they were written on academic-salaried time. We are paid to
teach
> > > and do research, not to write textbooks, so if we put more into our
> > > teaching materials because we anticipate that they can also be used
for
> > > a textbook that might bring royalties, that's a bonus for our
teaching.
> > >
> > > Having said that: most instructors (including me) have no interest in
or
> > > intention of writing a textbook, and put what they put into their
course
> > > materials because they want to. I don't think I would transfer
copyright
> > > for my course materials to my university, but not because I am
planning
> > > to make any revenue from them -- on the contrary, I want them to be
> > > open-access, just as my research is!
> > >
> > > Universities (like everyone else!) are still *extremely* confused and
> > > short-sighted about all these things, both with research publication
> > > and courseware. Yes, they have their eyes on distance-education
revenues
> > > (and they need them), but it is not at all clear that the way they
will
> > > make those revenues is by making their instructors transfer copyright
for
> > > their courseware to their universities! That is certainly one possible
> > > "business model" -- but then they will have to make special contracts
with
> > > their staff, hiring them to do contractual writing or video-lecturing
> > > for hire, which is something many instructor/researchers may again not
> > > be interested in doing (and it might be the good ones especially who
> > > are least interested!).
> > >
> > > So the universities, in thinking this through, have a few anomalies
and
> > > conflicts of interest to resolve yet. MIT -- no small player -- has
taken
> > a
> > > very decisive position on this: Its courseware will be open-access:
> > > http://ocw.mit.edu/index.html
> > >
> > > Is there a danger that if there are no royalties to be earned either
> > > instructors won't bother or MIT will lose potential revenue from the
> > > eventual distance-education market? I rather doubt it:
> > >
> > > First, the best institutions, with the best instructors, are the ones
> > > from which students will want their instruction and degrees. So the
> > > institution is far better off not discouraging its instructors'
> > > creativity. But those are just words. Here is something more concrete:
> > >
> > > I am certain that in *exactly* the same way that research impact --
the
> > > scientometrically enhanced counterpart of "publish-or-perish" -- has
> > > become a significant part of the academic coin-of-the-realm (with
> > > salary, promotion, tenure, grant-funding, prestige and prizes
depending
> > > on it), *so will teaching impact*!
> > >
> > > And just as the open-access era for research will generate more,
powerful
> > > and sensitive new measures of research impact through scientometric
and
> > > semiometric measures derived form the online research corpus -- new
> > > measures of usage ("hits"), co-citation "hubs and authorities," and
> > > many more rich and diverse correlates of research uptake and influence
> > >
> > > http://citebase.eprints.org/cgi-bin/search
> > > http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/cs
> > > http://citebase.eprints.org/analysis/correlation.php
> > > http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Hypermail/Amsci/2325.html
> > >
> > > -- so there will evolve an increasingly rich and predictive set of
> > > teaching-impact indicators along similar lines, quantifying which
> > > open-access courseware is being used, how, and how much, what has
> > > influenced and grown out of what -- perhaps even how it eventually
> > > feeds into research impact!
> > >
> > > And with such objective scientometric and semiometric measures of
teaching
> > > impact will come the reward mechanisms for reinforcing and encouraging
> > > their production, just as with research impact.
> > >
> > > So I would suggest you simply ignore what your university
administrators
> > > are noisily contemplating doing at the moment. These are early days,
> > > and it will be the spontaneous creation of courseware by innovative
> > > instructors, and its use by students, that will determine the
> > > direction things actually take -- not administrators fumbling around
> > > a-priori, trying to second-guess creative forces that are beyond their
> > > imaginations! And I'm fairly confident that that direction will be
mostly
> > > open-access (along with the teaching-impact reward system it
engenders)
> > > rather than coursework-for-hire.
> > >
> > > Just keep doing your online courseware. And if you want to keep it
safe
> > > from toll-grubbing hands, put it in open-access archives so it's too
> > > late for anyone to try to cash in on it!
> > > http://www.eprints.org/
> > > http://www.dspace.org/
> > >
> > > Stevan Harnad
> > >
> > > NOTE: A complete archive of the ongoing discussion of providing open
> > > access to the peer-reviewed research literature online is available at
> > > the American Scientist September Forum (98 & 99 & 00 & 01 & 02):
> > >
> > > http://amsci-forum.amsci.org/archives/American-Scientist-Open-Access-Forum.html
> > > or
> > > http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Hypermail/Amsci/index.html
> > >
> > > Discussion can be posted to: american-scientist-open-access-forum_at_amsci.org
> > >
> > > See also the Budapest Open Access Initiative:
> > > http://www.soros.org/openaccess
> > >
> > > the Free Online Scholarship Movement:
> > > http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/timeline.htm
> > >
> > > the OAI site:
> > > http://www.openarchives.org
> > >
> > > and the free OAI institutional archiving software site:
> > > http://www.eprints.org/
> > >
> > >
>
> --
> Non aux Brevets Logiciels - No to Software Patents
> SIGNEZ http://petition.eurolinux.org/ SIGN
>
> Bernard.Lang_at_inria.fr ,_ /\o \o/ Tel +33 1 3963 5644
> http://pauillac.inria.fr/~lang/ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Fax +33 1 3963 5469
> INRIA / B.P. 105 / 78153 Le Chesnay CEDEX / France
> Je n'exprime que mon opinion - I express only my opinion
> CAGED BEHIND WINDOWS or FREE WITH LINUX
Received on Tue Jan 07 2003 - 07:31:30 GMT