[FC-discuss] Free Thesis Project Released Today

[Fred Benenson]

This issue is more complex than this thread is letting on. It's my
understanding that universities that hold their student's rights hostage are
in the minority, and only do so when they are substantially tied to an
industry. USC and the film industry come to mind, and MIT and the biotech
industry is another example. Their policies vary, but it is not as simple as
"owning what the students make." In the case of MIT (MIT students, correct
me here if I'm wrong), I believe they hold a 3 year term of rights of first
refusal. While unconscionable in its own right, it is not the same as
perpetually owning the rights of the work that students create. But again,
I'm sure there are more egregious examples out there. The point is, it's
counterproductive to start shouting about how corrupted the university's
intentions and policies are when we're not really discussing specifics.

To throw another one in, NYU, proudly disclaims any ownership over student's
work, in every part of the university. That includes Tisch, a film school
whose a majority of graduates go on to work in the film industry. I've heard
more than once that this is a deciding factor when students are choosing
between the film programs at NYU and USC, respectively.

So to the extent that there is some choice over this issue for matriculating
students, I don't think this is a lost battle, and perhaps one that the
"market" for universities will sort out. One important question to ask is,
what happens if (properly informed, mind you) students are simply complacent
with abdicating their rights to the university? Should we allow them to do
this? I get wary once we start arguing that we should override thoughtful
decisions for the sake of our own ideology.

That said, I think we could all do a better job of advocating for full
disclosure and discourse on university copyright policies. From my
experience at NYU, the policy (as "permissive" as it is) tends to get caught
up in years of bureaucratic review before a new version comes out, so
traditional reform isn't a terribly attractive process.

Maybe we could come up with a "worst offenders" hitlist as an org?


F

On 5/4/07, Crosbie Fitch <crosbie at cyberspaceengineers.org> wrote:
>
> > From: rob at robmyers.org
> > Well they may be restricted by publication requirements or college
> > policy. But if not then this is indefensible.
>
> It's indefensible ANYWAY. It's indefensible for a university to interfere
> with the ability of its students to disseminate their discoveries,
> creations, research, and knowledge to the public (their peers today and
> tomorrow).
>
> It used to be the case that the university had a hard time trying to
> persuade students to PUBLISH their discoveries and knowledge for the
> benefit
> of mankind rather than to hoard them for themselves.
>
> And now we find that the universities have become corrupted to hoard their
> students' work in precisely the way they had previously admonished*.
>
> It's bad enough that students are overly policed in their exploration and
> exchange of popular culture, but when they are even policed against
> publishing their own work, then this is tantamount to indentured
> employment.
>
> Time for students to assert (not merely plead for) ownership of their own
> work sufficient to dedicate it to the public.
>
>
>
> *  It may once have been the case that a university felt it had to
> confiscate the commercial privileges that copyright and patent might grant
> to students - in order to ensure the student didn't, in the process of
> exploiting them, impair the dissemination of their work. Unfortunately, it
> seems that universities have inevitably corrupted this philanthropic
> motive
> into a selfish one - the more wealthy the university, the more
> economically
> self-sufficient it becomes (through commercial exploitation of its
> scholars'
> and students' work), presumably it argues, the better its contribution to
> science and the arts?
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at freeculture.org
> http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://freeculture.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20070504/e3c6da2a/attachment.htm