Copyright Corner (September, 2014)

ULFA Copyright Update Follow-up Study on Course-Related Copying A new study of U of L course-related copying has been launched as a follow-up to an earlier study which looked at Spring 2012 courses. Reproduced here is the memo e-mailed to all faculty and sessional instructors in June 2014 that outlines the new study’s purpose. (Please continue reading for more) Dear Faculty Member, Many of you will be aware of significant shifts in copyright law within the past two years that now “allow educators and students to make greater use of copyright material”—one of the specific aims of the 2012 Copyright Act amendments. At the same time, as our copying environment remains a complex terrain to traverse, there is a continued need for University community members to be knowledgeable about their obligations under copyright law and licenses as well as the available options for using protected works in copyright-compliant ways. Over 2012/13 I investigated the permission status of copied works used in Spring 2012 courses, including materials distributed via Moodle. The purpose was to gather reliable, comprehensive data on course-related copying that would suggest areas in which copyright education and permission assessment tools may be needed, and inform longer term decision-making such as whether or not to renew the University’s blanket copying license covering January 2011 to December 2015. Thanks to the 89% of faculty who said they used Moodle in Spring 2012 and allowed me to access their courses, we have a detailed one-semester snapshot that suggests the most important permission sources for course-related copying are the Copyright Act (under fair dealing), textbook publishers, and library licenses which together account for more than 75% of all works examined. Less than 2% of Spring 2012 course-related copying was attributable to permission provided by the blanket license. I will shortly commence a follow-up study to confirm and update the original study’s findings, this time focusing on Fall 2013. The impetus for a second study is threefold: as the copying activity assessed in the original study is now two years old, collecting more recent data is prudent while we remain covered by a blanket license; a comprehensive picture of our course-related copying should include a fall semester as well as a spring semester since some courses are typically offered only in the fall or the spring; and the Teaching Centre indicates the number of instructors who use Moodle and the breadth of Moodle functions now being used has increased dramatically over the past two years. Recently I met with faculty members Scott Allen and Robbin Derry, Teaching Centre staff member John Kometz, and Betsy Greenlees, Copyright Assistant, who generously agreed to help me review the original study protocols and plan a suitable approach for the follow-up study. Our conclusion is that the original study’s approach, on the whole, remains appropriate. The limited changes to be incorporated into the follow-up study will refine the consent request process and strengthen the protection of privacy in the data collection process. In brief, the goal of the follow-up study is to gather data on the permissions status of works used in Fall 2013 Moodle courses. As with the original study, the follow-up involves minimal risk since its focus is on the likely permission sources, when needed, for works used in Moodle, and not on whether those uses might infringe copyright. The study will not collect information identifying specific works used such as author or title. Anticipated benefits of participating include helping to deepen our understanding of the University’s copyright education needs and of the permission sources depended on by the University. Participation in this study is voluntary and participants are free to withdraw up to the point at which copyright data has been gathered from their Moodle courses and anonymized. All data collected will be treated as confidential, and analyzed data will be reported only in aggregated, anonymized format. They will be used only to inform our understanding of matters relevant to the overall question of the kinds and volume of, and permission sources for, course-related copying. Collected data will not be used in any way to investigate possible copyright infringement. The study’s protocols have been approved by the Human Subject Research Committee, as were those for the original study. If you taught at least one Fall 2013 course I will shortly contact you via e-mail with a request to grant me permission to gather copyright-related data from all of your Fall 2013 Moodle courses. The access I will be seeking is that of a course “auditor,” meaning that student assignments and grades will not be accessible to me. The consent request e-mail will outline the kinds of data to be collected and the research procedures that will be used. Questions regarding your rights as a participant in this research may be addressed to the Office of Research Services, University of Lethbridge (Phone: 403-329-2747 or E-mail: research.services@uleth.ca). Study findings will be shared with faculty members via means similar to those used for the 2012/13 study (e.g., ULFA Newsletter columns and presentations at faculty department and council meetings.) In the meantime, if you have questions or concerns about this follow-up study, please contact me or any member of the ad hoc group. Rumi Graham University Copyright Advisor Follow-up study ad hoc group: Scott Allen Rumi Graham Robbin Derry Betsy Greenlees John Kometz --- As I am on study leave for 2014/15, my colleagues Sandra Cowan will be filling in as Acting Copyright Advisor with the assistance of Mike Perry. If you need help with any copyright-related matter in the coming year, please feel free to contact the Copyright Advisor office at copyright@uleth.ca or 403-332-4472 where Betsy Greenlees, Copyright Assistant, along with Sandra and Mike, will be happy to assist you. Last Modified: Friday, 17 October 2014. http://ulfa.ca/news-events/item/ulfa-copyright-updat