Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

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 faculty guidelines.

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Talab c2c i_pand_moocs

  1. 1. Online Intellectual Property in the Age of MOOCs Rosemary Talab, Professor, K-State Slideshare
  2. 2. Disclaimer Opinions are my own Audience participation requested Audience survey
  3. 3. The “Hype”
  4. 4. Overview MOOC Landscape Ownership Issues Intellectual Property Copyright Basics Bills/Lawsuits Faculty Guidelines
  5. 5. Overview MOOC Landscape Ownership Issues Intellectual Property Copyright Basics Bills/Lawsuits Faculty Guidelines
  6. 6. MOOC Landscape 3.17 million students 196 countries (Outsell, 2013) edX self-sustaining Coursera & Udacity commercial Spinoffs – MITx, Berkeleyx, etc.
  7. 7. MOOC Landscape Bill Gates (2013): “Decoupling” of degree from knowledge acquisition Use of alternate evidence (badges, certificates, etc.) “Global phenomenon”
  8. 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. 9. MOOC Landscape Online courses time-consuming Merit, tenure/promotion variable Online use more university resources Multi-national/multi-campus universities Territory?
  10. 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. 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. 12. Overview MOOC Landscape Ownership Issues Intellectual Property Copyright Basics Bills/Lawsuits Course Guidelines
  13. 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. 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. 15. Ownership Issues
  16. 16. Overview MOOC Landscape Ownership Issues Intellectual Property Copyright Basics Bills/Lawsuits Course Guidelines
  17. 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. 18. Overview MOOC Landscape Ownership Issues Intellectual Property Copyright Basics Bills/Lawsuits Course Guidelines
  19. 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. 20. Copyright Basics Faculty Own: Negotiated IP (“life of course”, alterations, etc.) Syllabus – copyright Original materials Derivative works Ideas Presentation
  21. 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. 22. Contract Law K-State – “written statement…from… unit leader concerning level of use of … support/facilities…” Extra compensation IP protection
  23. 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. 24. Substantial Use “Substantial resources”: Used for many distance courses  Institution as owner Also depends on: Platform requirements Contract IP policy
  25. 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. 26. Overview MOOC Landscape Ownership Issues Intellectual Property Copyright Basics Bills/Lawsuits Course Guidelines
  27. 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. 28. Overview MOOC Landscape Ownership Issues Intellectual Property Copyright Basics Bills/Lawsuits Faculty Guidelines
  29. 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. 30. Faculty Guidelines Creative Commons approach Faculty committees Purdue MOOC RFP Committee Online Course Committees IP discussions
  31. 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. 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. 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. 34. Fini
  35. 35. Fair Use Resources Visual Resources Association: Visual Resources Association Statement on Images Fair Use Evaluator
  36. 36. References  Purdue MOOC proposal  Rutgers Statement on MOOCs 
  37. 37. References  BerkeleyX (3-year MOOC development)   MITx  UC Irvine prof replaced /
  38. 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. 39. References  Rivard, R. (2013). Who owns a MOOC?  E-Literate. (2013). California’s Online Education Bill SB 520 Passes Senate. 
  40. 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. 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. 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. 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+.