Open movements have gained increasing importance in various areas. In this paper we are interested in the particular case of Open Educational Resources (OER) and more specifically in the use of OER in Management Education. We first present the results of a two years length exploratory study concerning faculty`s knowledge, experience and perception about OER with a particular focus on Management Education. This was so far an unstudied subject and our findings were interesting as a first step of understanding. We pointed out the main motivations and barriers relative to the production and use of OER and showed some significant differences between Economics/Management faculty and other faculty, the first ones being less advanced than the second ones.
We`ll then come to describing our OER experience in Grenoble Ecole de Management. After our first study in 2006, we decided to launch an OER initiative in our Business School and developed our OpenCim website with the aim of providing open educational resources for Management Education. We deliberately focused on resources in French Language to address the francophone academic community (faculty and students). This initiative has so far been very successful. We gather a large and highly satisfied number of readers, among them many Africans. Moreover the feedback of producers (participating faculty) is, again, excellent and we think we have overcome the main barriers identified two years ago.

Open Educational Resources for Management Education Lessons from experience

Introduction: We Should Run Like It Is Godzilla At one point in the spy-caper parody film Goldmember, Austin Powers and his friends are chasing the movie's villain through Japan. Their car gets stuck inside a giant foam dinosaur, which then drives through a crowded square. Panicked citizens scream and run. The scene then focuses on two Japanese men in business suits: Man 1 [Brian Tee]: Run! It's Godzilla! Man 2 [Masi Oka]: It looks like Godzilla, but due to international copyright laws, it's not. Man 1: Still, we should run like it is Godzilla! Man 2 [to the camera]: Though it isn't. Both: Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! (Godzilla Scene, 2006) This scene (see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fu62k4K4sQ4 to watch a fan-uploaded copy) elicits a laugh from viewers because in everyday life, we seldom think about intellectual property and copyright, let alone interrupt moments of terror to do so. U.S. copyright law is clear about the protections afforded to owners of intellectual property—like the writers and movie-makers who own the character Godzilla—when such property is used for commercial purposes. However, what should faculty members in higher-education institutions do when they want to show scenes from Goldmember to their students during classroom sessions, or as part of online courses? Copyright law is less specific about the \"fair use\" exception for scholarly purposes (17 US Code § 107). Jonathan Band recently wrote about the relationship between specific exceptions in copyright law and fair-use provisions: The Copyright Act generally does not explain the relationship between the specific exceptions and fair use. The one departure from this silence occurs in 17 USC § 108, which provides exceptions for libraries and archives. Section 108(f)(4) states that nothing in section 108 \"in any way affects the right of fair use as provided by section 107.\" This savings clause has been understood to mean that the exceptions enumerated in section 108 do not restrict the availability of fair use to libraries and archives. In other words, libraries and archives can still rely on fair use to engage in activities not explicitly permitted under section 108. (Band, 2012) Band's point is that \"fair use\" extends beyond specific exceptions from copyright based on the type of entity involved in the use of copyrighted content. Are you confused yet? Further complicating the situation is the fact that the original U.S. copyright statutes were adopted in the 1970s, before many present-day forms of communication and data storage, especially the Internet, existed. Administrators in higher-education institutions are faced with an often-conflicting landscape of laws, court cases, adopted practices, rules of thumb, and folk wisdom related to copyright concerns on their campuses. Ask any ten faculty members on your campus, and you will likely receive ten different responses about what constitutes fair use, who owns content created for courses, and what intellectual-property rights apply to faculty members and the institution (Kordsmeier, Gatlin-Watts, and Arn, 2000). Part of the challenge for higher-education administrators is that a deep understanding of copyright requires much more study and training than most faculty members are able to spare beyond their subject areas. Based on the questions I've received at many of my copyright workshops and lectures since 2000, faculty members are often hungry for clear and simple guidance in three key areas: use of copyrighted materials for teaching purposes, ownership of content created by faculty members, and the rights of individuals and institutions under various intellectual-property ownership-agreement structures. This article will guide higher-education administrators in adopting policies and practices for their campuses that are easy to remember and apply, and that provide rule-of-thumb ways to define fair use of copyrighted content, highlight alternative means of providing access to copyrighted content, and suggest the most common models of ownership and rights associated with intellectual property and multimedia content created by faculty members. Part 1: Use of Copyrighted Materials for Teaching Purposes Meet Professor Pool Gene Pool is a professor in the biology department at a state university on the west coast. As part of his course on marine biology, Dr. Pool wants to show his students an entire 2-hour documentary, Nick Hope's Reef Life of the Andaman. Gene has a DVD copy of the program that he bought in 2006. He's recently learned that Bubble Vision, the company that produced the video, in October 2012 added new footage and posted the full 2-hour video of the second edition on its YouTube channel (Hope, 2012). The DVD remains available for sale on their web site for $24.95. Gene went to his dean, Minnie Strator, confused on a number of fronts. Can Gene download the video from YouTube so he has a copy to show his students that doesn't rely on having a live Internet connection (which can be spotty in certain classrooms on campus)? Is it okay to copy just one scene from the longer video and include it in Gene's course environment in the campus learning management system (LMS)? Since there's a new edition, is the first edition no longer covered under copyright? Why would the company post the whole video for free and still expect to sell DVD copies? Before we address Gene and Minnie's dilemma, take a few minutes for a short quiz. A Short Quiz 1. Which of the following choices is an example of copying? a) Linking to a file on YouTube. b) Sharing the web address of a file on YouTube. c) Saving a video file from YouTube onto your own computer. d) Providing the key words for finding a video on YouTube. 2. Which of the following are NOT protected by copyright? a) Works created by the federal government. b) Works that display the copyright symbol ©. c) Works that are published on the Internet. d) Student-written papers in your class. 3. Which of these works is protected by copyright? a) Your spouse's unpublished personal journal. b) A movie from 1930 whose copyright has not been renewed. c) Software code where the creator expressly gives up all rights to the work. d) The latest report from the U.S. Congressional Budget Office. Answers 1. c), 2. a), 3. a) What is a Copy? The questions in the quiz, as well as Gene Pool's questions for Minnie Strator, highlight two elements of copyright law that are in conflict: protecting original works and the ability to make copies. At its core, the concept of copyright applies to the right of the originator of a work to restrict others from making copies of the work. However, the definition of what constitutes a copy has evolved rapidly since the 1970s when the copyright law was first adopted. Initially, a copy was easy to define: a physical reproduction of the original content. Copies were also easy to identify because of their physical form, including photocopies, reprints, cassette tapes, phonograph records, posters, and musical scores. Higher-education faculty members and administrators could easily tell whether copies had been made—and thus whether copyright considerations needed to be observed. The advent of computer data files expanded the definition of \"a copy\" significantly. One can now make exact duplicates of word-processing files, sound clips, movies, and software programs. The ease of copying data separately from a physical format has led to a culture of \"information freedom\" in which a) the trail of content ownership is easily muddied or erased, b) copying entire works requires vanishingly diminishing effort, and c) there is a popular misconception that public access equals the abrogation of ownership rights: if it's out there, it must be free to use. A last confusion: the answer to Gene Pool's question about downloading a YouTube video can get knotty. Faculty members are often unsure about how to decide questions about copying, embedding, and linking to intangible resources like Internet videos (Sweeney, 2006). In order to display the marine-biology video from YouTube, Gene's computer has to create a temporary copy of the video as the file is streamed from YouTube's servers. Gene's computer (indeed, any end-use device like a tablet or smart phone) does not hold on to such temporary copies, though; when new content comes in, it over-writes older content. Fortunately, these concerns can be put aside if we define copies as intentional reproductions of all or part of original works, where the copies are located in a different place than the original works. This definition is easy to remember, covers physical and digital reproduction, and will come in very handy about twenty paragraphs from now. What Is and Isn't Copyrighted Questions 2 and 3 in the short quiz help to put some scope to what is and isn't covered by copyright. The assumption behind copyright is that everything—all created work—is initially covered by copyright, and only items specifically exempted are not covered. That is why students own the copyright for the papers and projects they create for course assignments, and why unpublished works like diaries are covered by copyright, and why even works that do not display the copyright symbol and have not been registered formally with the U.S. Copyright Office are still covered under copyright. Basically, if you create it, it's covered by copyright. Copyright was intended, though, to allow creators of works to enjoy the benefit of their labors, and copyright law allows copyright to expire after a period of years. Also, works created under certain circumstances are also \"born\" without copyright (that is, they are considered in the public domain): those created by the federal government. works more than 70 years old (after the life of the author), where copyright has not been renewed. situations in which the creator expressly gives up some or all rights to the work. works created by multiple/corporate authors where the content is \"un-own-

/pdf/training-your-faculty-about-copyright-when-the-lawyer-isn-t-4kaotrit3m.pdf

Training Your Faculty about Copyright When the Lawyer Isn't Looking.

Copyright and fair use laws that regulate educational materials seem to be fairly well understood by the U.S. courts and educators for use in face-to-face (f2f) classrooms (Post and Trempus, 1998). Ever-changing revisions to these laws blur the distinction between tangible and intangible materials shared with students in f2f, online and hybrid courses and must be decided on a case by case basis. As a result, educators face legal and ethical challenges as they take advantage of easy copy and paste tools in the digital medium, particularly if they want to use content from web pages they did not create. Since copying and distribution of digital content is easy, how well can we apply our understanding of these laws, or do we just infringe and ignore the law? This study determined how faculty members at a Research 1 (Carnegie) institute applied their knowledge of copyright/fair use laws to digital course content, and if they were deterred from infringement in the design of their online materials. Background Conventional 1976 U.S. copyright law (17 U.S.C. § 101 through 122) was written to regulate copying, distribution and other uses of tangible materials such as books, journals, plays, artworks, sheet and recorded music, etc. The established portion of the copyright law known as “fair use” applies to handouts and printed materials reproduced for students in face-to-face classrooms. Internet technology offers an intangible medium for sharing information with students that is also covered by copyright laws. Ever-evolving revisions and additions to existing law (Crews, 2002 and 2001) such as the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA 1998) and the Technology, Education and Copyright Harmonization Act (TEACH Act 2002) were developed to protect digital content and to refine fair use policies. In this study the researcher examined university faculty members' decisions regarding fair use: to use/not use copied text, images, sounds, animations and video from someone else's web page with or without obtaining copyright permission, to pay/not pay copyright fees, or to ask/not ask for advice from the institution's copyright and fair use specialists. The researcher gathered data via online survey and focus groups. Specific research questions researched were: 1) Did misinterpretation of copyright and fair use law vary across post-secondary educators with regard to department, academic rank, gender, tenure or length of service? and 2) Were post-secondary educators deterred from infringing copyright and fair use policies in developing their online course materials? If so, what was their decision-making process ? Legal Behavior Compliance with any law, including copyright / fair use standards, is based on processes by

https://www.westga.edu/%7Edistance/ojdla/spring91/sweeney91.pdf

Faculty, Copyright Law and Online Course Materials

Handle everyday research tasks with reliable, citation-backed results

Your personal Research Agent to handle research tasks with citation-backed results

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Meet SciSpace

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

Phyllis C. Sweeney

Author Tools

Chat about Author

Papers

Faculty, Copyright Law and Online Course Materials