Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Talab c2c i_pand_moocs
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.


Introducing the official SlideShare app

Stunning, full-screen experience for iPhone and Android

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

Talab c2c i_pand_moocs


Published on

Online intellectual property in the age of MOOCs. Presentation explores MOOC landscape with regard to course ownership issues, intellectual property, copyright basics, current bills and lawsuits and …

Online intellectual property in the age of MOOCs. Presentation explores MOOC landscape with regard to course ownership issues, intellectual property, copyright basics, current bills and lawsuits and faculty guidelines.

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

No notes for slide


  • 1. Online Intellectual Property in the Age of MOOCs Rosemary Talab, Professor, K-State Slideshare
  • 2. Disclaimer Opinions are my own Audience participation requested Audience survey
  • 3. The “Hype”
  • 4. Overview MOOC Landscape Ownership Issues Intellectual Property Copyright Basics Bills/Lawsuits Faculty Guidelines
  • 5. Overview MOOC Landscape Ownership Issues Intellectual Property Copyright Basics Bills/Lawsuits Faculty Guidelines
  • 6. MOOC Landscape 3.17 million students 196 countries (Outsell, 2013) edX self-sustaining Coursera & Udacity commercial Spinoffs – MITx, Berkeleyx, etc.
  • 7. MOOC Landscape Bill Gates (2013): “Decoupling” of degree from knowledge acquisition Use of alternate evidence (badges, certificates, etc.) “Global phenomenon”
  • 8. MOOC Landscape  EU Mooc Production Fellowship (2013)  Uses iversity  Fellows - 25,000 Euros and assistance  Fellows retain all rights to content  Coursera in Canada and Australia  Udacity has 606 communities worldwide
  • 9. MOOC Landscape Online courses time-consuming Merit, tenure/promotion variable Online use more university resources Multi-national/multi-campus universities Territory?
  • 10. 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
  • 11. 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.)
  • 12. Overview MOOC Landscape Ownership Issues Intellectual Property Copyright Basics Bills/Lawsuits Course Guidelines
  • 13. 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?
  • 14. Ownership Issues University owns/wants to own online IP Instructional design Technical/infrastructure investment Personnel Faculty MOOC IP ownership varies Various MOOC license models
  • 15. Ownership Issues
  • 16. Overview MOOC Landscape Ownership Issues Intellectual Property Copyright Basics Bills/Lawsuits Course Guidelines
  • 17. 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
  • 18. Overview MOOC Landscape Ownership Issues Intellectual Property Copyright Basics Bills/Lawsuits Course Guidelines
  • 19. 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.
  • 20. Copyright Basics Faculty Own: Negotiated IP (“life of course”, alterations, etc.) Syllabus – copyright Original materials Derivative works Ideas Presentation
  • 21. 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
  • 22. Contract Law K-State – “written statement…from… unit leader concerning level of use of … support/facilities…” Extra compensation IP protection
  • 23. 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)
  • 24. Substantial Use “Substantial resources”: Used for many distance courses  Institution as owner Also depends on: Platform requirements Contract IP policy
  • 25. 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”
  • 26. Overview MOOC Landscape Ownership Issues Intellectual Property Copyright Basics Bills/Lawsuits Course Guidelines
  • 27. 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 prof’s syllabus, assignments, name and image
  • 28. Overview MOOC Landscape Ownership Issues Intellectual Property Copyright Basics Bills/Lawsuits Faculty Guidelines
  • 29. 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
  • 30. Faculty Guidelines Creative Commons approach Faculty committees Purdue MOOC RFP Committee Online Course Committees IP discussions
  • 31. 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
  • 32. 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” 
  • 33. 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?
  • 34. Fini
  • 35. Fair Use Resources Visual Resources Association: Visual Resources Association Statement on Images Fair Use Evaluator
  • 36. References  Purdue MOOC proposal  Rutgers Statement on MOOCs 
  • 37. References  BerkeleyX (3-year MOOC development)   MITx  UC Irvine prof replaced /
  • 38. References  Bart, M. (2010). Intellectual Property, Copyright, and Harassment: Navigating the Murky Legal Waters of Online Teaching. Faculty Focus. Retrieved from  Chronicle of Higher Education. (2012). The U. of Michigan's Contract With Coursera. Retrieved from
  • 39. References  Rivard, R. (2013). Who owns a MOOC?  E-Literate. (2013). California’s Online Education Bill SB 520 Passes Senate. 
  • 40. References  Porter, J. (2013). MOOCs, outsourcing and restrictive ip licensing  outsourcing-and-restrictive-ip-licensing/  Berkeley Resource Center for Online Education. UC Berkeley. Berkeleyx.
  • 41. 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.  Kolowich, S. (2013). Harvard professors call for greater oversight of MOOCs. Wired Campus.  Schmidt, P. (2013). AAUP sees moocs as spawning new threats to professors' intellectual property. Chronicle of Higher Education.
  • 42. 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+.
  • 43. 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+.