Re: L.Rev (C) Release

On Fri, 5 Nov 1999, Harold Federow <haroldf[_at_]bsquare.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 04, 1999, Mark Lemley <mlemley[_at_]mail.law.utexas.edu> wrote:
> >
> > Yes, but unfortunately we are pretty clearly employees acting in the
> > scope of our employment. That is enough to trigger work-for-hire
> > status under the 1976 Act, unless the non-statutory "teacher
> > exception" is thought to apply.
>
> Or something else might also apply: At the University of Washington here
> in Seattle, the code governing faculty and professional staff explicitly
> exempts these kinds of things from University ownerships (but does not
> do the same for inventions!). So, you also have to check the governing
> "employment" documents.

But is this really sufficient to take things out of work for hire situation? Possibly if you view these rules as defining what is within the scope of employment for faculty, but then again, there is always the argument that you make below - that they are hired to teach, research, and write. If that is the case, then at best I would think that the school policies would work to create a limited license to the faculty to license their works.

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The preceding was not a legal opinion, and is not my employer's.
Original portions Copyright 1999 Bruce E. Hayden,all rights reserved
My work may be copied in whole or part, with proper attribution,
as long as the copying is not for commercial gain.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Bruce E. Hayden                      bhayden[_at_]acm.org
Phoenix, Arizona                     bhayden[_at_]ieee.org
                                     bhayden[_at_]copatlaw.com