university IP policies and subventions

[Jessica Reyman]

Dear colleagues,

My home institution (Northern Illinois University) has proposed a new policy for royalties, in which faculty who receive subventions from the university to pay fees for using copyrighted works in their published books must share royalties with NIU. Our current IP policy states that for projects that "receive direct allocation of funds from the university," the university retains intellectual property rights. In the past, while the IP policy could be interpreted to establish university ownership for projects that receive ANY university support (e.g., travel funding for related research, funding for copyright fees and other production costs), faculty have retained copyright ownership in practice under these circumstances.  

I am looking to collect anecdotal information about the IP policies at other institutions and the relationship to subventions. I am looking for information on 1) what your university's IP policy states about the assignment of copyright ownership when subventions are given and 2) whether common practice differs from policy. 

Thanks in advance. I value your collective knowledge, and welcome anyone to share experiences or insight into the issue.

Jessica Reyman

Associate Professor of Rhetoric and Professional Writing

Department of English

Northern Illinois University

DeKalb, IL 60115

[Jeff Galin]

Jessica,

I was just going through back email on my Gmail account and came across your message.  I spent years on the IP committee at FAU and played a big role in crafting our IP policy as well as negotiating changes for the union contract.  There are still some inconsistencies, but the rules on traditional works of scholarship are absolutely clear.  The university claims no ownership of traditional works of scholarship period.  I am attaching the document.  I have highlighted the pertinent parts.  There are about five.  The purpose of disclaiming workshop of scholarship are obvious, not the least of which faculty cannot choose their own publishing venues, created derivative works, etc, if the university owns them.  University ownership also flies in the fact of the goals for that traditional exemption at most institutions.  

We are addressing a similar issue but for classes that were developed with some kind of university support. THe university has carved out an exception to regular instructional work to capture ownership of online courses, but it does not assert ownership to courses that were developed with funds from other units like WAC and our QEP.  IT makes no sense to carve out exceptions like this.  

Please let me know what happens at your institution.  BTW. I wrote a chapter about IP policies addressing exactly these issues in Steve Westbrook's book.  It is called Own Your Rights:  Know When Your University Can Claim Ownership of Your Work."

cheers,

jrg

--

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Intellectual Property Caucus" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to intellectual-propert...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Jeffrey R. Galin

[Porter, James]

Hi Jessica,

Like Jeff, I'd been meaning to reply to your inquiry as well. Here is where you can find Miami University's faculty copyright statement --> https://blogs.miamioh.edu/miamipolicies/?p=374&print=print.

Miami uses the common metrics of "significant university resources" and also "explicit university assignment or commission" as the key criteria for determining whether the University can make a copyright claim on a faculty member's work. So far, that has NOT meant: If the University pays for your travel to a conference, they have a copyright claim on any publications that arise from your conference presentation. I don't know how a subvention would work. That would hinge on the adjective "significant." I wouldn't think that paying a few hundred bucks for copyright permissions would make a difference; but covering cost of publication in the thousands might well might. But that's just my guess; there's where the ambiguity lies.

Miami has been much more focused on the question of online course development, as you can tell from the policy: Under what circumstances can the University claim ownership of faculty member instructional materials for online courses? If the faculty member receives "significant university resources" in the form of IT help or online course design help, videography, etc., the university is definitely going to make a claim.

It sounds like your university is engaging in creeping copyright incursion. As Jeff suggests, we may be entering an era where universities try to carve out exceptions piecemeal. Good luck to you, and please do keep us updated! (Good luck to all of us ... this is going to become a general issue.)

Best, Jim

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
James E. Porter, PhD
Professor, Department of English and
Armstrong Institute for Interactive Media Studies

office: Bachelor Hall 279
office phone: 513.529.6520

email: port...@miamiOH.edu

comp/rhet graduate program: http://miamioh.edu/comprhet
linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/pub/james-e-porter/1a/521/731

twitter: reachjim

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
 

[Kim Gainer]

Jessica,

Attached is an intellectual property policy for Radford University that has been proposed by the university's Intellectual Property Committee and is now being mulled over by a Faculty Senate committee. See below for an excerpt addressing cases when faculty members would not retain only partial ownership of their work.

Best,

Kim

Traditional faculty authored works: Faculty members retain full ownership of scholarly or creative works they produce as part of their traditional obligation to publish such works and the university’s tradition of upholding academic freedom.

There are three exceptions:

1) When work is created as part of a specific assigned duty outside of the scope of ordinary teaching and research obligations under a specific work for hire rationale (for example, in helping to prepare a departmental or university report), the copyright belongs to the university;

2) When the university has made a substantial direct investment in a faculty authored work (also defined as an exceptional use of institutional resources), the university and the author may share copyright. The definition of a substantial university investment is a direct expenditure of at least $10,000 or 25 percent of a faculty member’s salary, whichever is greater. General support for faculty in terms of library facilities, information technology that supports teaching and learning or office space shall not be included in assessing substantial investment. Terms for sharing of copyright shall be developed through the university’s Intellectual Property Committee.

3) Distance Learning Materials - Distance learning materials and courseware created by faculty without the substantial use of university resources, or not as part of a directed work as listed above in B (1), shall remain the property of the faculty member. If the development of distance learning materials or courseware has required substantial use of university resources, or as part of a directed work, the university will own the copyright, but the faculty member and the university will both retain a non-exclusive license to use these materials in educational settings, even if the faculty member leaves the university. Should there be any commercial potential for the materials or courseware developed with substantial use of university resources, the faculty member and the university shall share in any revenues per the royalty distribution matrix described in this policy.