On 2/29/00, Robert A. Baron <rabaron[_at_]westnet.com> wrote:
>
> On 2/27/00, Art MacCord <amaccord[_at_]rcblaw.com> wrote:
> >
> > It seems to me that any copyrightable material that a college
> > instructor prepares as part of his or her job is likely to be owned
> > by his or her employer unless there is a contract provision providing
> > otherwise. See 17 US Code 101 for the definition of a work made for
> > hire.
>
> Think of the consequences of the above assertion.
[snipped parade of horribles]
I agree that it is outrageous for a university to claim ownership of course outlines, lecture notes, lecture performances (e.g. lectures that have been taped for remote viewing), texts written by the faculty member, articles written by the faculty member, etc.
However, barring a statute that regulates the content of contracts between universities and their employees, the issue becomes a matter of contract. If the contract is silent, the work for hire doctrine probably applies.
Every time I teach for University of California (Berkeley) extension, I duly cross out the claim asserted in their contract that they own my course materials.
I recently accepted an appointment as Professor of Software Engineering at Florida Institute of Technology. This was one of several schools that I considered over the last year. One of the factors in my accepting their offer was an explicit provision in their standard contract that (as to the relative rights of the university and myself), I am the sole owner of copyrightable works that I produce.
http://www.kaner.com/
http://www.badsoftware.com/
Author (with Falk & Nguyen) of TESTING COMPUTER SOFTWARE (2nd Ed, VNR) Author (with David Pels) of BAD SOFTWARE (Wiley, 1998)
This e-mail communication should not be interpreted as legal advice or a legal opinion. The transmission of this e-mail communication does not create an attorney-client relationship between me and you. Do not act or rely upon law-related information in this communication without seeking the advice of an attorney. Finally, nothing in this message should be interpreted as a "digital signature" or "electronic signature" that can create binding commercial transactions. Received on Wed Mar 01 2000 - 14:01:42 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Mar 26 2007 - 00:35:38 GMT