Abstract:

Universities play a critical role in the creation and dissemination of new knowledge. Intellectual property policies, in general, provide academic institutions with a framework for addressing this role by defining ownership rights and setting parameters for usage prerogatives. It is commonplace for institutions to develop intellectual property policies related to new inventions, patents, and copyrightable materials that might result in financial returns or establish controlling interests over future domains. It is also commonplace for institutions to extend their intellectual property rights and prerogatives to course content and materials developed by faculty and used for classroom instruction, particularly those materials developed for use in online instruction. A recent survey of higher education institutions reported that over 70% of U.S. universities had policies that defined this ownership and that only 10% permitted faculty to retain sole ownership. Work-for-hire doctrines have made it typical for institutions to have policy statements indicating that they own all course content and course materials developed by faculty during the course of their employment.

This trend of university policies to claim ownership of course content and course materials has been regarded by faculty organizations as an increasing threat to academic freedom, a potential stifling factor with regard to academic and pedagogical creativity, a barrier to faculty-institution cooperation, a source of conflict with faculty work conducted outside of the institution, and a potential impediment or complication in negotiations with prospective publishers of academic content. Concern about the impact of institutional encroachment on faculty intellectual property rights is so severe that the American Association of University Professors has issued a “warning” that faculty intellectual property rights are “in danger.”

Clarification about conditions in which faculty retain intellectual property rights over course content and materials are routinely addressed in collective bargaining contracts between faculty and institutions. However, it is not common for these clarifications to be present in institutions in which faculty do not have some form of collective representation. This presentation will report on a case study of one such institution which took initiative to work with faculty to develop an innovative intellectual property policy for faculty-developed course materials and content. The presentation will discuss key issues, processes, and factors associated with the design, development, and implementation of the policy and its emerging early impact.

Keywords:

Intellectual Property, Higher Education, Faculty Rights.