Template -- Teachers @ Work

The issue of copyright when using information accessed from internet sources is contentious and surrounded by myths and pseudo-legal opinion. At a recent conference, one of the speakers made the statement that "teachers can use any information they like on their intranet without copyright infringement as it is not available to the general public." While this may sound somewhat logical, it is unfortunately false.

To clarify matters, let us start of the beginning. Any time someone records information in a permanent format, no matter what that format may be, that information is immediately copyrighted and is the legal possession of the person who created it. It is not necessary for that person to place a copyright insignia of any type on the information. It is theirs by right of the fact that they produced it. If anyone but the author wishes to use that information, or any part of that information, in any permanent format, they must gain the original author’s permission.

Another common myth is the issue of "fair use". In general the interpretation of "fair use" states that “a person may reproduce up to 10% of the original document as long as they are an educational institution or they are not directly making profit from the use of that information." If we extrapolate this concept then anyone could reproduce 10% of Encyclopaedia Britannica on a web site and this would not break copyright law, and this is obviously a nonsense.

We tend to believe these things because we want to believe them and it conveniently exonerates the user and allows us to extend the ”budget”, initially through use of the photocopier and now through the school intranet. The concept of "fair use" stems from the precepts of free speech. In other words it is a principal of the freedom of speech to be able to refer to a document or statement by another person. There are some copyright agreements in place, in some countries, that do allow a certain percentage of a document to be photocopied for individual classroom use but this only pertains to a set collection of documents and not “anything that you could possibly find anywhere on the Internet”.

The flow on from this is information that is stored on the school intranet. Normal copyright law applies here just as it would in any other environment. Just because you limit the audience does not mean you can now violate copyright law. Publishing on the intranet is legally the same as publishing in any other environment and the same copyright laws apply.

Another common issue in education circles involves the use of student created material on a school web site/intranet or Knowledge NET. The student holds copyright over any material that they create just as any adult would. In order to publish student created material on your web site/intranet or Knowledge NET you must get permission from both the parent and the student. This can be done in a generic format by having parents and students sign a document at the beginning of each year, allowing material created by the student to be placed on the school web site/intranet or Knowledge NET. But even after this has been signed it is common courtesy to check with the student that they are happy about that particular piece of work being placed in a public or school environment.

The New Zealand government has an excellent policy for online publication of student images and work[1][1] available from the web site http://www.tki.org.nz/r/governance/curriculum/copyguide_e.php . This online policy provides 10 guidelines regarding the privacy and copyright issues associated with publishing student work.

As done above I can freely refer to the content and facts that are presented in an article without breaking copyright law. However, if I wish to quote directly from the source or if I merely rearrange the language but in essence say the same thing then I am breaking copyright. For additional information on issues associated with "fair use" you can refer to the excellent article by the Working Group on Ownership, Legal Rights of Use and Fair Use of the CSU-SUNY-CUNY Joint Committee entitled “Fair Use of Copyrighted Works: A Crucial Element in Educating America.[2][2]” http://www.cetus.org/fairindex.html

The next issue is how the information should be cited. There are many different formats for citing information, however two formats are “percolating to the top of the pile” and becoming de facto standards. These two formats are: MLA (Modern Languages Association) and APA (American Psychological Association). How these two groups came to define how written material should be cited is an interesting story in itself.

In this case what can complicate matters is Digital Rights Management or better known by its acronym DRM. How the digital rights (associated with any information) are managed has a direct impact on how easily we can access information. Not surprisingly companies such as Microsoft http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/drm.aspx [6][6] have a range of technologies that allow information to be distributed only to those people who pay a licence in order to view it. The information is encrypted and password protected ensuring that information is not placed in the public arena, but rather becomes available only to those people who pay for it. This enhances the rights of people who produce content and reduces the rights of the general public. The rights of the general public are reduced because they no longer able to exercise their “fair use" rights.

Other companies who are in the business of producing information are also attempting to enhance their rights over the content they produce and not surprisingly this includes organisations and companies such as the motion picture and recording industry. For additional information on DRM see the DRM section of the American Library Association[7][7] http://www.ala.org/ala/washoff/WOissues/copyrightb/digitalrights/digitalrightsmanagement.htm

Unfortunately digital rights management could possibly see a dramatic gulf open up between those that have the capacity to purchase access to information and those that do not. Historically the Internet has been the great leveller, allowing access to huge amounts of information at very low-cost. The capacity for organisations to hide information behind encryption and passwords could considerably increase the digital divide and reduce the democracy of information and hence knowledge.

As is almost always the case, the balance is to ensure that those who create information are able to profit by it (not necessarily financially), while at the same time ensuring that Knowledge is made as widely available as possible and as cheaply as possible.

In schools there are some complicating factors when it comes to who owns the intellectual property of a particular document. This is complicated as you are employed by your employing authority to carry out particular tasks. One of those tasks may well be seen to be the creation of units of work and hence the school trustees or governing authority may indeed feel that some of the intellectual property of what you have created belongs to the school or the employing authority. The possibility of you making your next million dollars from the sale of units of work that you have created for the classroom is actually very small; however the chances of the potential for this causing grief between you and your employing authority is reasonably high.

Increasingly, as more and more information gets placed in a digital format on web sites/intranets and Knowledge NET's it is important to have an understanding between the employing authority and the teachers as to who owns, and who should profit from the intellectual property which has been developed within the school. In order to address this situation we developed a “Memorandum of Goodwill” two years ago that teachers and the employing authority could agree to. The "Memorandum of Goodwill" sets up a framework for when a teacher either wishes to commercialise some aspect of the work that they have created, or when they move on from a particular school and they are replaced by a new teacher. The “Memorandum of Goodwill” allows the authoring teacher to take with them the electronic information that they have developed but also encourages them to leave behind a copy of electronic information within the school.

Please feel free to edit this memorandum as you wish to suit your particular situation/circumstance. [Yes, I am saying I am suspending my own copy-rights here!] This memorandum is not a legally binding document but rather a guiding document governing the intellectual property right(s) of potential authors (electronic or physically produced works), and their employing authority. You are free to use this document is any way, shape or form that you wish and all we ask is that you identify teachers@work as the original source.

Each of the following elements are agreed to by the signatory identified below and ratified by the employing authority.

1.0	The intellectual property right(s) pertaining to any material written or produced by any author in any format automatically remains with that author.
2.0	As a sign of goodwill the author agrees, in recognition of the use of equipment, training and resources of the school, that the material produced may be used within the school freely and at no cost to the school, on the condition that the original authors name and a crest or logo representing the governing body of the school, remain affixed to the front page of the document and in the footer of every subsequent page of the document.
3.0	The author also agrees that any other employee of the school may edit or adapt the work as they see appropriate, on the condition that the original authors name and a crest or logo representing the governing body of the employing authority, remain affixed to the front page of the document and in the footer of every subsequent page of the document.
4.0	Should the employing authority or the author be approached by any other external organization/individual in regards to the authors work being used in an environment outside that of the institution governed by the employing authority, then both parties agree to consult with each other on whether this new application/use of the work is acceptable.
5.0	Should the authors work be used by an external organization/individual then the authors name and the school crest/logo shall remain on the front page and in the footer of each subsequent page of the work. If any editing or adaptations are made to the work(s) then the words “adapted from an original work by ___________________ (insert authors name)” shall precede the authors name and the employing authorities crest/logo.
6.0	The author also agrees that should any payments be made to the authors employing authority or the author in regards to this work then a separate agreement will be signed by both parties and that any royalties, payments or remuneration in any way shape or form shall be shared equally between both parties.
7.0	Should the author cease to be employed by the original employing authority (at the time that the authors work was produced), then the original employing authority shall retain the right to use the works according to the conditions agreed upon in this document, with no remuneration due unless agreed upon by both parties.
7.2	Any agreements regarding any royalties, payments or other remuneration between the author and employing authority shall continue for a period of 12 calendar months (or to the end of the contractual period agreed to), following the resignation of the author from the employing authority. At the conclusion of this twelve-month period the author shall retain full intellectual property rights and any subsequent agreements entered into by the author shall be at the author's discretion.
8.0	The author, upon accepting employment from a new employing authority, can enter into a new agreement with the subsequent employer and a new agreement will supersede any previous agreements with previous employing authorities (excepting clause 7.2). The author may make available to their new employing authority any works that they may have produced at no cost, or, at their discretion, incur a royalty, payment or remuneration that they may negotiate.

Signed ________________________________ (legal representative of the employing

authority) Date ____________________

This e-mail message was sent through by Innes Kennard from the Wairarapa Education Centre following our comment on PowerPoint in last month’s newsletter

Re “Your powerpoint tip (Ctrl or Command B or W). You needed to add that the user needs to set the cursor to Pen (Ctrl or Command P) so that they can use the whiteboard. You can even have a blackboard with a white pen – just like chalk. If they want to turn the pen off again then Ctrl or Command U will do it. Many just use the B and W to hide the show while they address other things and don’t realise the pen option.”

The use of technology to intimidate, bully and extort is cruel and untenable, but banning the technology responsible will not prevent the problem.

As many governments have discovered, you cannot legislate an ethic. All communication technologies including the phone have evolved despite the issue of abuse, as their benefits are seen to outweigh their negative applications. When the telephone was introduced to society, it was available only to a select few, due to its prohibitive cost. As the cost of the telephone then gradually reduced, more people were able to use it. As this happened, the amount of abuse was proportionately small. . Why is this? The social ethic that controls the use of the telephone dictates that the use of the telephone for this purpose is unacceptable.

In general the culture associated with telephone use is a very strong one, even though a minority still overstep the boundaries. The same development timeline can be applied to the mobile phone. It has great personal communication advantages but the culture of “I must answer the phone” can be seen as rudeness in some situations and the “acceptable use culture” of the mobile phone is still evolving. In time we will see the same evolutionary “acceptable use culture” develop for other evolving technologies although there will always be those that step outside these boundaries and abuse the privileges that these technologies confer. . However, not all technologies make it through this process. Interestingly the social ethic of Instant Messaging did not evolve sufficiently quickly and was dropped by Microsoft under pressure from community groups.

All communication technologies including the phone/mobile phone have evolved despite some people abusing them to gain personal advantage. Nonetheless the telephone is not only still with us but has come to be regarded as an indispensable part of today’s world. In short, the telephone has survived because (a) it’s advantages by and largely outweigh its disadvantages, and (b) an increasingly vigilant society in conjunction with some responsible government legislation has over time, developed a code or ethics that exerts sufficient control to make it a viable option for communication. The same too can be said of e-mail. .

. . . . .and so too with the internet. The current abuse of the many facets of the internet, particularly chat-rooms, child porn, the promotion of hatred/violence/ethnic superiority . . ., etc and the like will ultimately be managed by a largely responsible society that has come to acknowledge that progress, like the ebb and flow of the tide, is irreversible and simply has to be dealt with

In conclusion, the evolution of technology would appear to bring with it a social and cultural “values” package as well as a technological one. The necessity for teaching ethics becomes greater with every passing day. In our society some of our children are growing up amoral as opposed to immoral and have not received sufficient guidance/encouragement to make complex ethical decisions. In our present society it is possible for young children to grow up devoid of exposure to a culture of morality and ethics which values the individual, encourages and values compassion, empathy, consideration . . . .. Too often young children see the entire social strata from politicians and celebrities (who have traditionally acted as role models) to their own family members act in a manner that at best provides an inconsistent set of values and ethics. As educators we not only have a golden opportunity but also carry the ultimate responsibility of ensuring that the technology used in our schools is used appropriately and responsibly, and that appropriate behaviour is modelled consistently, and reinforced throughout the learning process.

[1] "GUIDELINES FOR SCHOOLS for the ONLINE PUBLICATION of STUDENT IMAGES and

SCHOOLWORK." te Kete Ipurangi. 21 July 2003. Ministry of Education, Wellington, New Zealand . 15 

Mar. 2004 http://www.tki.org.nz/r/governance/curriculum/copyguide_e.php .

[2] "Fair Use of Copyrighted Works: A Crucial Element in Educating America." Consortium for 

Educational Technology for University Systems. 25 Apr. 1996. California State University, State 

 University of New York, and the City University of New York. 15 Mar. 2004

 http://www.cetus.org/fairindex.html .

[3] "Using MLA Style to Cite & Document Sources." Bedford St. Martin's Publishing. 2003. Bedford/St.

Martin's. 15 Mar. 2004 http://www.bedfordstmartins.com/online/cite6.html .

[4] "Using APA Style to Cite & Document Sources." Bedford St. Martin's Publishing. 2003. Bedford/St.

     Martin's. 15 Mar. 2004 http://www.bedfordstmartins.com/online/cite5.html

[5] "Noodle Bib4." Noodle Tools. 28 Feb. 2004. 15 Mar. 2004 

     http://www.noodletools.com/noodlebib/index.php   .

[6] "Digital Rights Management." Windows Media Center. 2004. 15 Mar. 2004 

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/drm.aspx .

[7] DIGITAL RIGHTS MANAGEMENT AND LIBRARIES." American Library Association. Apr. 2003. 

American Library Association. 15 Mar. 2004 

http://www.ala.org/ala/washoff/WOissues/copyrightb/digitalrights/digitalrightsmanagement.htm .