Talab c2c i_pand_moocs
Embed Size (px)
Transcript of Talab c2c i_pand_moocs
- 1. Online Intellectual Property in the Age of MOOCs Rosemary Talab, Professor, K-State email@example.com Slideshare
2. Disclaimer Opinions are my own Audience participation requested Audience survey 3. Overview MOOC Landscape Ownership Issues Intellectual Property Copyright Basics Bills/Lawsuits Faculty Guidelines 4. Overview MOOC Landscape Ownership Issues Intellectual Property Copyright Basics Bills/Lawsuits Faculty Guidelines 5. MOOC Landscape 3.17 million students 196 countries (Outsell, 2013) edX self-sustaining Coursera & Udacity commercial Spinoffs MITx, Berkeleyx, etc. 6. MOOC Landscape Bill Gates (2013): Decoupling of degree from knowledge acquisition Use of alternate evidence (badges, certificates, etc.) Global phenomenon http://tinyurl.com/musst8v 7. MOOC Landscape EU Mooc Production Fellowship (2013) Uses iversity Fellows - 25,000 Euros and assistance Fellows retain all rights to content https://moocfellowship.org/info Coursera in Canada and Australia Udacity has 606 communities worldwide 8. MOOC Landscape Online courses time-consuming Merit, tenure/promotion variable Online use more university resources Multi-national/multi-campus universities Territory? 9. Ownership Issues Growth of course production values Result is increased use of institutional resources Shutterstock - art and photographs online 27 million images Jon Oringer is billionaire Forbes, June 2013 http://tinyurl.com/p9m7v7b 10. MOOC Landscape Decreased tenured faculty Increased adjunct faculty Increased costs/tuition Decreased federal/state support Rise of online for-profits (Capella, Walden, U of Phoenix, etc.) 11. Overview MOOC Landscape Ownership Issues Intellectual Property Copyright Basics Bills/Lawsuits Course Guidelines 12. Ownership Issues Who owns a course? Who decides? Who gets what in MOOC licensing? Is there a MOOC IP model? Do old IP models apply? 13. Ownership Issues University owns/wants to own online IP Instructional design Technical/infrastructure investment Personnel Faculty MOOC IP ownership varies Various MOOC license models 14. Ownership Issues 15. Overview MOOC Landscape Ownership Issues Intellectual Property Copyright Basics Bills/Lawsuits Course Guidelines 16. Intellectual Property Michigan/Coursera contract Revenue bulk to host/provider Substantial university investment Multi-media content High-production-value Disabilities, badges, etc. (Chronicle, 2012, p. 2) Course IP - Instructor/University decision 17. Overview MOOC Landscape Ownership Issues Intellectual Property Copyright Basics Bills/Lawsuits Course Guidelines 18. Copyright Basics Make a copy Make a derivative work Distribute copies Perform work in public on website (videos) Display work (still image, each copyrighted) Section 101, Title 17 U.S.C. 19. Copyright Basics Faculty Own: Negotiated IP (life of course, alterations, etc.) Syllabus copyright Original materials Derivative works Ideas Presentation 20. Copyright Basics Faculty must know: Federal law, state, institutional policies Contract law supersedes copyright law Definitions: Substantial use Work for hire Definitions vary by institution/state 21. Contract Law K-State written statementfrom unit leader concerning level of use of support/facilities Extra compensation IP protection 22. Substantial Use K-State creator received staff, salary or material support beyond that normally provided to the creator Instructor-initiated or otherwise Institution-provided support (technical/monetary/other) 23. Substantial Use Substantial resources: Used for many distance courses Institution as owner Also depends on: Platform requirements Contract IP policy 24. Work for Hire K-State owns: Rights associated with works produced as works made for hire or Works that make "substantial use of institutional resources 25. Overview MOOC Landscape Ownership Issues Intellectual Property Copyright Basics Bills/Lawsuits Course Guidelines 26. Bill/Lawsuits California SB 520: Grants for high demand courses to be offered online Arizona State professors lawsuit Violated the ABOR Intellectual Property Policy Appropriated course Used former profs syllabus, assignments, name and image 27. Overview MOOC Landscape Ownership Issues Intellectual Property Copyright Basics Bills/Lawsuits Faculty Guidelines 28. Faculty Guidelines Know Applicable IP policies State Board of Regents or other Institution Pertinent sections (work for hire, etc.) Claim rights to original materials Claim rights to class lectures and course materials Negotiate a reasonable approach 29. Faculty Guidelines Creative Commons approach Faculty committees Purdue MOOC RFP Committee Online Course Committees IP discussions 30. Faculty Guidelines Rutgers Advisory Council Credit bearing guidelines Non-credit bearing guidelines MOOC offered through Rutgers approved through Rutgers curricular review regardless of format Time is now to voice concerns Finding a balance helps everyone 31. Summation Carly Nelson (former AAUP President) "If we lose the battle over intellectual property, it's over "Being a professor will no longer be a professional career or a professional identity Faculty will find themselves in "a service industry http://chronicle.com/article/article-content/139743/ 32. Summation Do faculty want compensation based on intellectual property rights or collective bargaining? Will tenured faculty IP rights be reduced? Will institutions become courseware Walmarts? Will research universities will be separated? 33. Fini 34. Fair Use Resources Visual Resources Association: http://www.arl.org/pp/ppcopyright/codefairuse/index.shtml Visual Resources Association Statement on Images http://www.vraweb.org/organization/pdf/VRAFairUseGuidelines Fair Use Evaluator http://librarycopyright.net/resources/fairuse 35. References Purdue MOOC proposal https://www.distance.purdue.edu/ Rutgers Statement on MOOCs http://senate.rutgers.edu/ICAConMassiveOpenOnlin 36. References BerkeleyX (3-year MOOC development) https://www.edx.org/school/uc%20berkeleyx/allcourses MITx http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2013/oeit-joins-office-of-digital- UC Irvine prof replaced https://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/professor-leaves-a- / 37. References Bart, M. (2010). Intellectual Property, Copyright, and Harassment: Navigating the Murky Legal Waters of Online Teaching. Faculty Focus. Retrieved from http://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/online-education/intellec Chronicle of Higher Education. (2012). The U. of Michigan's Contract With Coursera. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/Document-Examine-the-U-of/1330 38. References Rivard, R. (2013). Who owns a MOOC? http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/03/19/u-c E-Literate. (2013). Californias Online Education Bill SB 520 Passes Senate. http://mfeldstein.com/californias-online-education-bi 39. References Porter, J. (2013). MOOCs, outsourcing and restrictive ip licensing http://aims.muohio.edu/2013/02/26/moocs- outsourcing-and-restrictive-ip-licensing/ Berkeley Resource Center for Online Education. UC Berkeley. Berkeleyx. http://online.berkeley.edu/moocs/berkeleyx 40. References Voss, B. (2013). Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs): A Primer for University and College Board Members. Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges. http://agb.org/sites/agb.org/files/report_2013_MOOCs.pdf Kolowich, S. (2013). Harvard professors call for greater oversight of MOOCs. Wired Campus. http://tinyurl.com/ojbgr7o Schmidt, P. (2013). AAUP sees moocs as spawning new threats to professors' intellectual property. Chronicle of Higher Education. http://chronicle.com/article/article-content/139743/ 41. References Talab, R. (2008). Using digital materials in online courses: A cautionary tale of Georgia State University. TechTrends, 4(52), (in press). Talab, R. (2007). Distance education, public domain, free and fair use resources: A webliography. TechTrends, 4(51), pp. 9+. Talab, R. (2003). An initial look at the TEACH Act. TechTrends 2(47), pp. 2+. 42. References Talab, R. (2007). Faculty distance courseware ownership and the Wal-Mart approach to higher education. 5(51), TechTrends, pp. 9+. Talab, R., & Butler, R. (2007). Shared electronic spaces in the classroom: Copyright, privacy, and guidelines. TechTrends 1(51), pp. 12+. Talab, R. (2003). An initial look at the TEACH Act. TechTrends 2(47), pp. 2+.