Graham (2016)

From Copyright Evidence
Jump to: navigation, search

Advertising Architectural Publishing of books, periodicals and other publishing Programming and broadcasting Computer programming Computer consultancy Creative, arts and entertainment Cultural education

Film and motion pictures Sound recording and music publishing Photographic activities PR and communication Software publishing (including video games) Specialised design Television programmes Translation and interpretation

1. Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare 2. Relationship between creative process and protection - what motivates creators (e.g. attribution; control; remuneration; time allocation)? 3. Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (creators and producers/investors) 4. Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption) 5. Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media)

A. Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right) B. Exceptions (distinguish innovation and public policy purposes; open-ended/closed list; commercial/non-commercial distinction) C. Mass digitisation/orphan works (non-use; extended collective licensing) D. Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability) E. Fair remuneration (levies; copyright contracts) F. Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness)

Source Details

Graham (2016)
Title: An Evidence-Informed Picture of Course-Related Copying
Author(s): Rumi Graham
Year: 2016
Citation: Rumi Graham,'An Evidence-Informed Picture of Course-Related Copying', College & Research Libraries, Vol 77, No 3 (2016), p.335-358. Available under: https://crl.acrl.org/index.php/crl/article/view/16513.
Link(s): Definitive , Open Access
Key Related Studies:
Discipline:
Linked by:
About the Data
Data Description: The Data has been collected from a survey among the users of the University of Lethbridge learning management system (LSM)in 2012. The users where asked to answere two questions: a) whether the instructor had used the LMS in spring 2012 for any purpose for each course taught, and b) when the LMS had been used, whether consent was granted to the researcher to access the instructor’s spring 2012 LMS course or courses in “auditor” mode.
Data Type: Primary data
Secondary Data Sources:
Data Collection Methods:
Data Analysis Methods:
Industry(ies):
Country(ies):
Cross Country Study?: No
Comparative Study?: No
Literature review?: No
Government or policy study?: No
Time Period(s) of Collection:
  • 2012
Funder(s):

Abstract

Recent changes in Canadian copyright law have prompted Canada’s educational institutions to reexamine their need for a blanket copying license. Users’ rights under the amended Copyright Act now include fair dealing for purposes of education, and the Supreme Court has established that copying short excerpts for classroom use can qualify as fair dealing. This study looks at one university’s examination of copied course materials made available via library reserve, coursepacks and its learning management system (LMS) and likely sources for copyright permissions, when needed. Results suggest that fair dealing is the most important and the institution’s blanket license is the least important basis for permissions clearance over a semester’s worth of copying.

Main Results of the Study

  • In some respects, the canadian copyright landscape contains more questions than ever before regarding the interdependent interests and rights of copyright owners and public users.
  • Education is now recognized under the Copyright Act as a fair dealing purpose,but there remain considerable differences in how copyright owners and educators understand the scope of fair dealing for educational purposes.
  • Fair dealing is the most important and the institution’s blanket license is the least important basis for permissions clearance over a semester’s worth of copying.

Policy Implications as Stated By Author

  • Fair Dealing and the applicability to the use within teaching isthe most important means to the lawful use of copyright protected works and needs to be preserved.
  • Fair Dealing needs to be clearly defined for the area of teaching to limit legal uncertainty.



Coverage of Study

Coverage of Fundamental Issues
Issue Included within Study
Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare
Relationship between creative process and protection - what motivates creators (e.g. attribution; control; remuneration; time allocation)?
Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (creators and producers/investors)
Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption)
Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media)
Green-tick.png
Coverage of Evidence Based Policies
Issue Included within Study
Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right)
Exceptions (distinguish innovation and public policy purposes; open-ended/closed list; commercial/non-commercial distinction)
Green-tick.png
Mass digitisation/orphan works (non-use; extended collective licensing)
Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability)
Fair remuneration (levies; copyright contracts)
Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness)

Datasets

Sample size: 471
Level of aggregation: Instructors
Period of material under study: Usage of the Universities learn-management-system in 2012.