Intellectual property schtick

Tyrannosaurus Cal

In registering for my course at Lancaster, I got told that they have full rights to any "intellectual property" I might create while I'm with them.

I ticked the box saying "Don't do this" because I just don't like the sound of it...

Does anybody know what it means?
Have a done the right thing in reserving my rights?

Thanks!

Reply 1

ma2k5

This would be on your work I would have presumed - I don't know why you would say no?

Reply 2

ChemistBoy

Full rights? That sounds unacceptable and you were right to refuse. Most universities offer a much better deal than this for staff and students regarding intellectual property. What it means is that, for example in a research project, you invent a commercially viable product that invention becomes the sole property of the university and you have no rights over it - I know here in nottingham the actual inventors get a large share in IP so I think Lancaster are taking the piss.

Reply 3

Morbo

That's a standard university clause, but it's usually accompanied by the caveat that you have to be using their facilities in order to create your IP.

Reply 4

ChemistBoy

Morbo

That's a standard university clause, but it's usually accompanied by the caveat that you have to be using their facilities in order to create your IP.

It isn't standard at all, most universities I know have an IP sharing agreement in place, I know because I've been part of one.

Reply 5

Morbo

ChemistBoy

It isn't standard at all, most universities I know have an IP sharing agreement in place, I know because I've been part of one.

In my experience, the University claims ownership of any IP within the remit of applicable law.

Oxford, Cambridge and Durham all do this, for example.

However, they then usually have in place regulations for the distribution of any revenues arising from the exploitation of the IP.

Reply 6

Clearing and Applications Advisor

ChemistBoy

It isn't standard at all, most universities I know have an IP sharing agreement in place, I know because I've been part of one.

A lot of these clauses are starting to pop up because of http://www.turnitin.com/ - once work is submitted turnitin keep a record for comparison to future submissions and there's some dispute over who has the right to give turnitin the right to keep a copy of the work...(or summit like that) - the plagiarism jiscmail email list has an archive of discussions on the topic but I don't think they came to any conclusion.

Reply 7

ChemistBoy

Nottingham, sensibly I think, negotiates rights and revenues on an individual basis, as a result I don't think one can call a full ownership by institution a standard across HE and I would be very wary of signing it because I believe it is unfair and the institution is try to pull one over on you. Granted that whilst you are a student or member of staff at an institution you will have access to the many services they provide, Universities are not private business and most innovations are down as much (if not more) to the personal effort of individuals rather than the services provided by the institution. The largest source of IP generation in a University, academic research, is conducted on an individual basis with academics being required to secure their own, external funding in most cases, so an agreement where IP is wholly owned by the institution is not a fair reflection on the contribution made by all parties.

Reply 8

Morbo

ChemistBoy

The largest source of IP generation in a University, academic research, is conducted on an individual basis with academics being required to secure their own, external funding in most cases, so an agreement where IP is wholly owned by the institution is not a fair reflection on the contribution made by all parties.

They are still paying you as an employee of the university. Securing funding for your department/project is part of the job. The university provides you with the office/lab space, libraries, interet access and departmental support. The university's product is intellectual property, and it rightly has ownership of any that is produced by its researchers.

If I'm an engineer working for an engineering company and come up with a new design, it's the company's property. No one has any beef with this. It's worse in industry, since none or few of the revenues from a product go to the design engineer. Universities recognise that it's individual effort that produces commericially exploitable IP, and hence there are revenue sharing agreements in place, examples of which I provided in my last post.

Reply 9

Clearing and Applications Advisor

Taken from the AUA newsletter:

"Since students are not employees of universities, there is a question over who owns the copyright in the works produced by them during their degrees. In addressing this issue, universities throughout the UK do not have a uniform approach to intellectual property and policies relating to ownership of intellectual property are extremely diverse. At one end of the scale are the universities which state that any work produced by its students belongs to the university, or demand, as a condition precedent to enrolment, that a prospective student pre-assign any intellectual property that he or she may generate in the course of his studies at the university. At the other end are those universities which expressly disclaim any ownership of copyright in works produced by students.

"The justification for a policy requiring assignment of copyright to the university has been questioned as students lack the remuneration and security of academic tenure of university employees whose copyright will rightly vest in the university. A copyright owner can choose whether work is distributed and may prevent its publication, and where this person is not the author of the work, but the university, this arguably amounts to an attack on academic freedom and the free dissemination of knowledge.

"In addition, on enrolment, a student lacks the bargaining power to negotiate terms with a university and would have little appreciation of the implications of an intellectual property policy. Even if he or she does, it would be extremely rare for them to decline an offer of a place at university because of that university's intellectual property policy. As such, universities are arguably abusing their stronger position to ensure they obtain the copyright in students' future work. If that is correct, the policy would be unenforceable and the student would be found to own their copyright works, not the university."
Ed Meikle
(who is apparently an expert on IP - but also apparently not an expert at expressing himself clearly and concisely :s-smilie:

)

Reply 10

ChemistBoy

Morbo

Actually the point is that it isn't like a private company at all. Research funding is not granted to departments it is granted to individuals (i.e. if you move institution your money and equipment goes with you) and as that is clearly the major factor in generating IP it is not as simple as the University rightly owning something because they pay you and house you. If it were the case that this behaviour was standard in HE then I guess I would be pissing in the wind, but Nottingham doesn't work like that and these ideas are ones that I'm repeating from several IP experts in HE.