Navigation
Who's online
There are currently 0 users and 0 guests online.
I mentioned in the caucus meeting today that I put together a document promoting the IP-themed sessions at the conference this year, as John Logie has done in the past, but that I wasn't passing it out because it was 22 pages long. Instead, I've uploaded it here so that you can, hopefully, check it out in time to attend some of these:
I am pleased to announce the publication of the third CCCC-IP Annual. Below I have posted the table of contents and the introduction. The html version of the collection isn't live yet, but I have attached PDF and .odt versions of the file to this post. They are available for download here:
http://ccccip.org/files/TopIP2007Collection_0.odt
http://ccccip.org/files/TopIP2007Collection_0.pdf
Introduction
Clancy Ratliff, University of Louisiana at Lafayette
McLean Students File Suit Against Turnitin.com: Useful Tool or Instrument of Tyranny?
Traci Zimmerman (Pipkins), James Madison University
The Importance of Understanding and Utilizing Fair Use in Educational Contexts: A Study on Media Literacy and Copyright Confusion
Martine Courant Rife, Lansing Community College and Michigan State University
The National Institutes of Health Open Access Mandate: Public Access for Public Funding
Clancy Ratliff, University of Louisiana at Lafayette
"Recut, Reframe, Recycle: Quoting Copyrighted Material in User-Generated Video"
Laurie Cubbison, Radford University
One Laptop Per Child Program Threatens Dominance of Intel and Microsoft
Kim Dian Gainer, Radford University
Bosch v Ball-Kell: Faculty May Have Lost Control Over Their Teaching Materials
Jeff Galin, Florida Atlantic University
Introduction
Clancy Ratliff, University of Louisiana at Lafayette
Co-Chair, 2008 CCCC Intellectual Property Caucus
The year 2007 carried quite a few key developments for those who follow issues and debates related to copyright and intellectual property. For the third year running, then, the CCCC Intellectual Property Committee is pleased to publish this annual report in the service of our first goal, to “keep the CCCC and NCTE memberships informed about intellectual property developments, through reports in the CCCC newsletter and in other NCTE and CCCC forums.”
In assuming the editorship of this year's collection, I have chosen to implement two changes which I believe embody the values of the Caucus and the IP Committee. First, I have licensed the collection under a Creative Commons license. This license allows readers to use the collection beyond the boundaries of fair use, provided the collection is not used for commercial purposes, the authors of the articles are credited, and no derivative works are made. One exception to the condition regarding derivative works concerns modifications for purposes of accessibility. Readers can, for example, create an audio recording of the collection or increase and change the font for the visually impaired. The main purpose for the Creative Commons license is to enable cross-publishing of the collection in a variety of online publication venues. I also hope that readers find the collection useful for the classroom. This collection may be reprinted in course packs or archived on course web sites under the terms of the Creative Commons license.
The second change I have made is to make the collection available in Open Document Format. In the past, the collection has been published in html and pdf format, as it is this year, but I am also publishing it as an .odt file, which can be opened in at least two open source word processing programs: OpenOffice and NeoOffice. I am uploading the file in .odt format as a public acknowledgment of the IP Caucus's growing awareness of software as intellectual work and open source software as intellectual work that is free and open for all to use and build upon.
Via Infocult, the kickoff of Academic Commons, which, as a combination discussion forum/quarterly journal, looks to be a very valuable resource. From the first edition page:
Academic Commons (http://www.academiccommons.org) offers a forum for investigating and defining the role that technology can play in liberal arts education. Sponsored by the Center of Inquiry in the Liberal Arts at Wabash College (http://liberalarts.wabash.edu), Academic Commons publishes essays, reviews, interviews, showcases of innovative uses of technology, and vignettes that critically examine technology uses in the classroom. Academic Commons aims to share knowledge, develop collaborations, and evaluate and disseminate digital tools and innovative practices for teaching and learning with technology. We want this site to advance opportunities for collaborative design, open development, and rigorous peer critique of such resources.
Academic Commons also provides a forum for academic technology projects and groups (the Developer's Kit) and a link to a new learning object referatory (LoLa). Our library archives all materials we have published and also provides links to allied organizations, mailing lists, blogs, and journals through a Professional Development Center.
The first issue of the quarterly looks very interesting. The pieces that pique my interest the most are these:
Technology & the Pseudo-Intimacy of the Classroom: an interview with University of Illinois-Chicago's Jerry Graff
http://academiccommons.org/commons/interview/graff
Graff's interest in "teaching the conflicts" as a way of rescuing higher education from itself has recently been replaced by a profound worry that higher ed is becoming increasingly irrelevant to American culture. We checked in to see what role Graff thinks technology might play in these unsettling times.
Copyright 101 by Richard Lanham, UCLA
http://academiccommons.org/commons/essay/lanham-copyright-101
The pervasiveness of digital media has so altered the nature of authorship and ownership that questions of intellectual property have become matters of core concern for our students and our contemporary culture. Lanham argues that these issues require an academic response, and that a basic course in copyright -- "Copyright 101" -- represents a first step in this process.
Cross-posted to Kairosnews and CultureCat.
Note: I've attached the document to this post; if you click "read more," you can see where to download it. Also: I didn't write these; I'm just the messenger.
What we discussed...
I. The IP caucus should publish an edited collection of IP/comp issues/work emerging from the caucus. Volunteer editors: Sally Chandler, Lisa Maruca, Wendy Austin, Gary Thompson—we will continue discussions of this in June. We would like to find a publisher who will create both a book and an online version.
II. Pedagogy not prosecution: Statement on Intellectual Property Issues Raised by Plagiarism Detection Services
Note: I didn't write these; I'm just the messenger.
Minutes from IP Caucus Group / Action Items
Our group largely focused on the shifting meanings of plagiarism and intellectual property across disciplines. Because these meanings vary so widely, students can end up confused around issues of citation, plagiarism, and intellectual property.
This problem is compounded by the nature of institutional writing in which, for example, someone else writes speeches for the president of a university. Who owns that writing?
The group discussed strategies for teaching these issues:
1.Let students know that what you’re teaching about plagiarism is discipline-specific.
John Logie began the CCCC Intellectual Property Caucus with a tribute to Candace Spigelman, co-chair of the Caucus, who passed away last year. Candace never lost sight of students in the process of talking about rhetoric and intellectual property. Institutions are here for the benefit of students. He set up a Candace Spigelman Memorial Fund, which will benefit the Caucus. Directions on how to contribute to the fund will be on the web site soon. Then he reviewed the MGM v. Grokster case and explained why we, as rhetoricians, should take an interest in it. He held up two sheets of paper, one in each hand, that said, "THE INTERNET IS A PEER-TO-PEER NETWORK." The Grokster case, he argued, represents the threat of suppressing technologies that merely have the potential to be used for copyright infringement. Jeff Galin (I think) posed these questions: Can we engage our students to get active in this as well? Can we imagine ways that free use and fair use might intersect? What roles are we going to play to challenge Congress and the entertainment industry?