Pascault et al. (2020)
Contents
Source Details
| Pascault et al. (2020) | |
| Title: | Copyright and Remote Teaching in the Time of COVID-19: A Study of Contractual Terms and Conditions of Selected Online Services |
| Author(s): | Pascault, L., Jütte, B.J., Noto La Diega, G., Priora, G. |
| Year: | 2020 |
| Citation: | Pascault, L., Jütte, B.J., Noto La Diega, G. and Priora, G. (2020) Copyright and Remote Teaching in the Time of COVID-19: A Study of Contractual Terms and Conditions of Selected Online Services. European Intellectual Property Review, 42 (9), pp. 548-555 |
| Link(s): | Definitive , Open Access |
| Key Related Studies: | |
| Discipline: | |
| Linked by: | |
| About the Data | |
| Data Description: | Data were obtained from the terms of nine online services used for the purposes of education during the COVID-19 pandemic (being Discord, Facebook, G-Suite for Education, Jitsi, Microsoft Teams, MoodleCloud, Skype, Zoom and YouTube). Legal analysis is focussed within the EU context (CDSM Directive, InfoSoc Directive). |
| Data Type: | Primary data |
| Secondary Data Sources: | |
| Data Collection Methods: | |
| Data Analysis Methods: | |
| Industry(ies): | |
| Country(ies): | |
| Cross Country Study?: | Yes |
| Comparative Study?: | Yes |
| Literature review?: | No |
| Government or policy study?: | No |
| Time Period(s) of Collection: |
|
| Funder(s): | |
Abstract
“The spread of the COVID-19 virus forced educational institutions to transition to online education. This contribution analyses, through the lens of copyright law, the terms and conditions of some selected online services used to deliver remote teaching. The study highlights the most problematic terms and their detrimental effects on remote teaching by focusing on copyright ownership, liability, and content moderation.”
Main Results of the Study
[[Has plain-text proposition::• Whilst all platforms observed reassure teachers that the copyright in their work is retained, many licence grants vary in the extent to which rights are transferred. Vague terms, such as the grant of rights to use upload or shared content to ‘improve the service’, may result in a loss of control over the teacher’s content (even if in principle the title of ownership still vests with them).
• All platforms observed place the onus on the teacher to ensure that any materials they upload to the platform do not infringe a third-party’s copyright. Some platforms also extend this obligation to students who share content. Unless Higher Education Institutions can provide a secure online environment through which to benefit from the new education exception in the CDSM Directive, expensive licensing agreements may be anticipated.
• Most platforms observed offer a means of notice and takedown, with the exceptions of Moodle and Jitsi. Most also offer a counternotification system, with the exception of Microsoft Teams and Skype. Content removal, and termination of accounts, may nonetheless be possible through broad disclaimers offered by Discord and Jitsi; that ‘in its sole discretion,[may] suspend, alter or stop providing the service, for any or no reason, including breach of the terms or suspected misconduct(e.g. copyright infringement).’]]
Policy Implications as Stated By Author
Whilst the study does not make any explicit policy recommendations, the authors find that the terms of teaching platforms ‘can make remote teaching more complicated than it should be’. The study recommends that Higher Education Institutions explore institutional solutions to setting their own terms of use for teaching materials.
Coverage of Study
Datasets
| Sample size: | 9 |
| Level of aggregation: | Platforms |
| Period of material under study: | 27 April 2020 |
