Download - Talab c2c i_pand_moocs

Online Intellectual Property in the Age of MOOCs

Rosemary Talab, Professor, K-State

[email protected]

Disclaimer

Opinions are my ownAudience participation requestedAudience survey

Overview

MOOC LandscapeOwnership IssuesIntellectual Property Copyright BasicsBills/LawsuitsFaculty Guidelines

MOOC Landscape

3.17 million students 196 countries (Outsell, 2013)edX self-sustainingCoursera & Udacity commercialSpinoffs – MITx, Berkeleyx, etc.

MOOC Landscape

Bill Gates (2013):“Decoupling” of degree from knowledge

acquisition Use of alternate evidence (badges,

certificates, etc.)“Global phenomenon”

http://tinyurl.com/musst8v

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

MOOC Landscape

Online courses time-consumingMerit, tenure/promotion variableOnline use more university resourcesMulti-national/multi-campus universitiesTerritory?

Ownership Issues

Growth of course “production values”Result is increased use of institutional

resourcesShutterstock - art and photographs

online27 million imagesJon Oringer is billionaire

Forbes, June 2013http://tinyurl.com/p9m7v7b

MOOC Landscape

Decreased tenured faculty Increased adjunct faculty Increased costs/tuitionDecreased federal/state supportRise of online for-profits (Capella, Walden, U of Phoenix, etc.)

Overview

MOOC LandscapeOwnership Issues Intellectual Property Copyright BasicsBills/LawsuitsCourse Guidelines

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?

Ownership Issues

University owns/wants to own online IP Instructional design Technical/infrastructure investment PersonnelFaculty

MOOC IP ownership variesVarious MOOC license models

Ownership Issues

Overview

MOOC LandscapeOwnership Issues Intellectual Property Copyright BasicsBills/LawsuitsCourse Guidelines

Intellectual Property

Michigan/Coursera contractRevenue bulk to host/providerSubstantial university investment

“Multi-media content” “High-production-value” Disabilities, badges, etc.

(Chronicle, 2012, p. 2)Course IP - Instructor/University decision

Overview

MOOC LandscapeOwnership IssuesIntellectual Property Copyright BasicsBills/LawsuitsCourse Guidelines

Copyright Basics

Make a copy Make a derivative workDistribute copiesPerform work in public on website

(videos)Display work (still image, each

copyrighted) Section 101, Title 17 U.S.C.

Copyright Basics

Faculty Own:Negotiated IP (“life of course”, alterations,

etc.)Syllabus – copyrightOriginal materialsDerivative works IdeasPresentation

Copyright Basics

Faculty must know:Federal law, state, institutional policiesContract law supersedes copyright lawDefinitions:

Substantial useWork for hireDefinitions vary by institution/state

Contract Law

K-State – “written statement…from… unit leader concerning level of use of …support/facilities…”

Extra compensationIP protection

Substantial Use

K-State – “creator received staff, salary or material support beyond that normally provided to the creator”

Instructor-initiated or otherwiseInstitution-provided support

(technical/monetary/other)

Substantial Use

“Substantial resources”:Used for many distance courses Institution as owner

Also depends on: Platform requirementsContractIP policy

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”

Overview

MOOC LandscapeOwnership IssuesIntellectual Property Copyright BasicsBills/LawsuitsCourse Guidelines

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 courseUsed former prof’s syllabus, assignments,

name and image

Overview

MOOC LandscapeOwnership IssuesIntellectual Property Copyright BasicsBills/LawsuitsFaculty Guidelines

Faculty Guidelines

Know Applicable IP policiesState Board of Regents or other Institution Pertinent sections (work for hire, etc.)

Claim rights to original materials Claim rights to class lectures and course

materialsNegotiate a reasonable approach

Faculty Guidelines

Creative Commons approachFaculty committees

Purdue MOOC RFP CommitteeOnline Course Committees IP discussions

Faculty Guidelines

Rutgers Advisory Council Credit bearing guidelines Non-credit bearing guidelinesMOOC offered through Rutgers approved

through Rutgers curricular review regardless of format

Time is now to voice concernsFinding a balance helps everyone

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/

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?

Fair Use Resources

Visual Resources Association:

http://www.arl.org/pp/ppcopyright/codefairuse/index.shtmlVisual Resources Association Statement on Imageshttp://www.vraweb.org/organization/pdf/VRAFairUseGuidelinesFinal.pdf

Fair Use Evaluatorhttp://librarycopyright.net/resources/fairuse

References

Purdue MOOC proposalhttps://www.distance.purdue.edu/

Rutgers Statement on MOOCs http://senate.rutgers.edu/ICAConMassiveOpen

OnlineCoursesFebruary2013AsAdopted.pdf

References

BerkeleyX (3-year MOOC development) https://www.edx.org/school/uc%20berkeleyx/allcourse

s MITx

http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2013/oeit-joins-office-of-digital-learning.html

UC Irvine prof replacedhttps://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/professor-leaves-a-mooc-in-mid-course-in-dispute-over-teaching/42381/

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/intellectual-property-copyright-and-harassment-navigating-the-murky-legal-waters-of-online-teaching/

Chronicle of Higher Education. (2012). The U. of Michigan's Contract With Coursera. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/Document-Examine-the-U-of/133063/

References

Rivard, R. (2013). Who owns a MOOC?http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/03/19/u-california-faculty-union-says-moocs-undermine-professors-intellectual-property

E-Literate. (2013). California’s Online Education Bill SB 520 Passes Senate.

http://mfeldstein.com/californias-online-education-bill-sb-520-passes-senate/

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

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/

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+.

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+.