I doubt the primary issue will be whether or not the policy governs the
employment contract. The primary issues are likely to be whether or not the
university employee was employed for the specific purpose of creating the
online course and/or whether substantial university resources were used.
Here is the Oregon University System policy:
6.215 Rights to Inventions, Technological Improvements, Educational and
Professional Materials
- The Board reserves the ownership rights to all institutional work-related
inventions, and to educational and professional materials developed with
institutional resources, including the right to a free and irrevocable
license for usage, and if desired, the licensing for use by others. The
foregoing does not preclude and institution employee from granting copyright
privileges to the publisher of a scholarly or professional journal when no
compensation or royalty is involved.
- Educational and professional materials shall be considered as having been
developed in the course of employment in those cases when the individual was
employed for the specific purpose of preparing or producing the material, or
was specifically directed to develop the material as part of general
employment duties and responsibilities. (but see last statement below)
- Lecture notes and other materials prepared by academic staff in
connection with a teaching assignment and with only accidental use of
institutional facilities, funds, staff, and other resources normally shall
be viewed as flowing from individual effort and initiative and shall not be
construed as having been produced in the course of discharging the
obligations of employment.
- Funds and facilities provided by governmental, commercial, industrial,
or other public or private organizations, but administered and controlled by
the institution and Board, shall be considered to be funds and facilities
provided by or through the institution and Board.
- If it is determined that inventions or materials developed are not
related to work or to an assigned project are not related to work or to an
assigned project and that development involved no or minimal use of
institutional funds or facilities, or that the material developed is
incidental to the individual work assignment, or that the institution and
Board have no right, vested interest, or claim in an invention, and the
institution decides to forego the licensing or patenting of an invention,
or the publishing and copyrighting of the material, the president or
designee may recommend to the Vice Chancellor for Finance and Administration
or a designee that the Board's interest and rights be waived, and that a
statement be issued which waives any institution or Board claim. Such a
waiver may be granted only if pre-existing commitments to sponsoring
agencies have been cleared. In the case of an invention, however, the
institution has usually provided substantial laboratory, supply and
equipment support. Therefore, the president or designee will normally
recommend the execution of a limited release only after the institution has
exhausted efforts to license or patent the invention. This release enables
the inventor to exploit the invention and recover reasonable
exploitation, licensing, and patenting costs related thereto and a sum up to
$10,000 out of the royalty income receipts, with the inventor and the Board
sharing equally in the balance of the net royalty income.
- Except as provided above, the ownership rights to all forms of
educational and professional materials in the form of books, musical, or
dramatic composition, architectural designs, paintings, sculptures, or other
works of comparable type developed by institution and Board employees,
either in conjunction with or aside from their employment, shall accrue to
the author, unless the material is prepared in compliance with contractual
provision or as a specific work assignment, or significant institutional and
Board resources were utilized. An academic staff person's general obligation
to produce scholarly works does not constitute such a specific institution
or Board assignment.
I always recommend clarifying these issues in advance.
I ran into significant problems with the University of Oregon College of
Education Dean because I requested credit overlay for an online course I am
developing. He asked about ownership rights. I indicated that my reading of
the policy was that since I am not currently employed by the UO and only
want credit overlay and the ability to host the discussion groups on the
university distance education system, that the UO had not ownership rights.
I had the dubious distinction of being the first person to ask for credit
overlay for an online course. He found the above language too confusing and
declined my credit overlay because he did not have the time to figure it
out.
Nancy
Nancy Willard, M.S., J.D.
Responsible Netizen Institute
http://responsiblenetizen.org
Received on Fri Aug 01 2003 - 23:56:32 GMT