Copyright Issues in Colleges and Universities

Cate, Fred H.; Gumport, Patricia J.; Hauser, Rolland K.; Richardson, James T.; Wexman, Virginia; Alger, Jonathan R.; Smith, Mark F.

doi:10.2307/40251265

Cited by 6 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is stipulated under the “work for hire” act. Conversely, faculty members, under the principle of academic freedom, are typically allowed to own the property they created (Cate et al , 1988). In the past, administrators have left copyright issues unchallenged because the value of most copyrighted material was insignificant.…”

Section: Legal Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the past, administrators have left copyright issues unchallenged because the value of most copyrighted material was insignificant. However, with the advent of Web‐based and related multimedia software, universities are re‐evaluating their stance on ownership of copyrighted intellectual property (Cate et al , 1988). Another significant factor causing universities to re‐think their views is commercialisation of intellectual property.…”

Section: Legal Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Commercialisation also raises new issues of third party involvement, especially when large corporations are among the players. The concern is that corporations do not have the same commitment to research for academic advancement as universities do, thus their involvement may hinder the researcher's ability to publicize new information (Cate et al , 1988).…”

Section: Legal Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

“…what effect did the use have on the potential market value of the copyrighted work (Cate et al , 1988).…”

Section: Legal Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Should there be corporate concern?

Fine

Castagnera²

2003

Journal of Intellectual Capital

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Academia is an industry like many of those in the private sector. It produces valuable patents, copyrights and other intellectual property. Consequently, the “research for sale” industry by way of corporate/university partnerships continues to grow. While it is certain that academics participating directly in corporate research partnerships are required to abide by project confidentiality agreements, their colleagues and other academic researchers peripherally involved may only be required to adhere to their own university's policies, which may or may not be sufficient. From a corporate executive and strategic policy standpoint, important questions arise. Are corporate interests protected by the presence of valid university intellectual property policies, or should there be concern? In an effort to answer this question, our article examines university policies for the purpose of determining which academic institutions are more likely to maintain protective policies, private or public, and which policies are most prevalent amongst universities: patent, copyright, general loyalty clauses, invention, trademark or trade‐secret policies.

show abstract

Section: Legal Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Legal Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Legal Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

“…what effect did the use have on the potential market value of the copyrighted work (Cate et al , 1988).…”

Section: Legal Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Should there be corporate concern?

Fine

Castagnera²

2003

Journal of Intellectual Capital

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Universities must then decide how the university will invest its share of the revenue. For instance, will the revenue go to a general operating budget; to the inventor's college, department, or laboratory; or be used solely for the support of future research (Cate, Gumport, Hauser, & Richardson, 1998)? Undoubtedly, some faculty not receiving what they feel is their fair share of the revenue will protest and possibly seek compensation through the court system (Guernsey & Young, 1998).…”

Section: Background and Importancementioning

confidence: 99%

<p>Whose Property Is It Anyhow? Using Electronic Media in the Academic World</p>

Sanders¹,

Richardson²

2002

JOTS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Journal of Technology Studies 117 Background and ImportanceThis article describes a study that examined the intellectual property policies at four-year higher education institutions in the Southern Regional Education Board (SREB) states to determine how these institutions assign ownership of distance learning and online courses and how they disperse income of intellectual property. Intellectual property has long been an issue of debate among colleges and universities (Heathington, Heathington, & Roberson, 1986). It is not surprising considering the controversial nature of determining ownership and income dispersion of creative works. To make matters worse, many institutions do not have adequate policies to govern the determination of rights to copyrightable materials (National Association of College and University Business Officers [NACUBO], 1980). As a result, intellectual property policies have been formed ad hoc and modified as problems arise (Nelsen, 1998).Policies regarding patents have raised fewer questions in higher education institutions than those regarding copyright, perhaps because patents have been lucrative for a longer period of time or the law is clearer for patents than for copyrights (Gorman, 1998). Although President Clinton signed the Digital Millennium Copyright Act in October of 1998, this legislation did not update the current copyright law to facilitate the development and implementation of distance learning and other forms of technology. Hence, the inadequacy of copyright law has become increasingly evident with the growth of the Internet (Berg, 1999).In academe, books and articles written by faculty members have traditionally been considered the intellectual property of the faculty members (Nelsen, 1998). Perhaps this explains why most higher education institutions do not address the issue of ownership of courses and curriculum materials in faculty contracts or policies (Harney, 1996). However, the potential economic value of multimedia and online course materials has raised the stakes for colleges and universities and prompted them to reexamine their intellectual property policies (McIsaac & Rowe, 1997). In some ways, online courses and course materials are like inventions, and in other ways they are like textbooks. The law is still unclear as to who owns traditional scholarly materials at the university, and making the distinction for online materials would mean the difference between the institution retaining ownership of instructional materials or ownership residing with faculty (Guernsey & Young, 1998).The distribution of funds resulting from the creation of intellectual property is of equal or greater concern. Higher education institutions retaining ownership must decide how much of any proceeds will be given to the individual creator. Universities must then decide how the university will invest its share of the revenue. For instance, will the revenue go to a general operating budget; to the inventor's college, department, or laboratory; or be used solely for the support of fu...

show abstract

Teaching in the Information Age: A New Look

Albright¹

1999

New Drctns for Teach & Learn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Copyright Issues in Colleges and Universities

Cited by 6 publications

References 0 publications

Should there be corporate concern?

Should there be corporate concern?

<p>Whose Property Is It Anyhow? Using Electronic Media in the Academic World</p>

Teaching in the Information Age: A New Look

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About