Category Archives: Class Discussion

The Wonderful World of Disney

As a former teacher in multimedia, I have remained very aware about copyright issues. Adding to that, moving from the United States to Canada has given me an interesting perspective on two similar but varying copyright laws. Personally I am very torn on modern copyright and think that those people who are in power have abused the original purpose of copyright. So it is definitely an issue that I am conflicted about when teaching. On the one hand, I do not want to tell my students to break the law, however, if you feel a law is unjust, it is our duty to challenge it. Hence why I like to bring up the issues of copyright in my classroom. As teachers, we have a unique opportunity to use copyrighted works for educational purposes and I think that we need to push that as much as we can. I would regularly show a documentary called Good Copy, Bad Copy in my class that touches upon the various copyright laws around the world. It was an excellent discussion starter because it challenged the commonly held belief that without copyright, artists would never make any money. It has made me very upset that with the recent Trans Pacific Partnership, copyright laws that are vastly different than those in North America are being forced upon their citizens without the proper discussions. Unfortunately for our students they will be finding themselves in a world where the idea of public domain is a fantasy. There will always be a corporation that chooses to profit from someone’s old work than to let people enjoy it without restriction. I seriously wonder how these laws are going to affect artists in the future and I think we need to bring these issues to light within our classrooms.

Sex, drugs, rock n’ roll and teaching

If I had my way, everything would be free. In the old days before recording, musicians would constantly play each others songs, maybe changing the order or altering lyrics slightly, and these would be passed on for generations without any clue as to who might have originally come up with certain musical or lyrical phrase. Almost all music today still borrows from this past.

I’m a musician and songwriter (with a SOCAN membership since 1996, incidentally) and though I’ve always been proud of my originality, I wouldn’t mind at all if someone played one of my songs, as long as they weren’t profiting from it. But that’s the non-commercial part of Creative Commons.

And my music is really at odds with being a public school teacher. Sex, drugs and rock n’ roll need to be quietly hidden away from my elementary-aged students and their parents. All the music stuff I’ve put online predates my teaching career, but with my band just starting to play live again after 11 years, it could come up. It’s still a conundrum for me. I’m hoping my MET degree will enable me to continue working in education but in a capacity where a lyric from a song I might have written in 1999 won’t come back to haunt me.

What the heck is ‘rephotographing’ anyway?

Copyright issues in a visual arts classroom is often the centre of focus. In my opinion, it is an unreal expectation that student will go out and photograph their own reference images and too often Creative Commons images do not provide students with an mage that is suitable for a particular work. That being said, students are reminded to identify and give credit to any image they use. We use the analogy of a works cited list for a paper – what resource/source imagery have you used in the production of your work of art? Unfortunately, there is no Bibliography that accompanies a work of art.

When we consider the skills that we are teaching students and the tools they use – ones that allow them to easily mix audio and video from different sources, the idea of ownership becomes blurred. When the latest craze is to ‘mash-up’ different songs, videos and images into something new, how do can we speak of intellectual property. YouTube alone is an excellent example – how much of the content on YouTube is original? How much is repurposed or mashed-up? Who is the artist? To whom should the credit be given? Is it the original creator or the individual who took parts of it and transformed it into something new?

I think of Richard Prince, the artist who ‘rephotographed’ hundreds of Instagram selfies and sold them at auctions for $100 000. Prince took images by other people (usually attractive, 20-somethings) added some creative Instagram-like text and emojis and printed them on a large scale. Prince never asked permission from the subjects of the photos to publish them, nor did he compensate any of the individuals. Is this not an infringement on the individual’s privacy? Firstly the images came from accounts that are not private, which means they are viewable by all. Secondly, because Prince added comments and deleted the existing ones, he can argue that his work is ‘transformative’ and under the US Copyright Act he is protected.

In this era of online digital editing tools and Web 2.0 media creation tools, issues of copyright must be re-thought and redefined.

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jul/18/instagram-artist-richard-prince-selfies

Copyright and Digital Footprints

Copyright and Digital Footprints

Copyright and digital footprints are two topics that have gained much importance with the rise of mass media and the advent of new technology.  In my undergraduate degree it was briefly mentioned, yet never truly expanded upon.  I believe this was due to the reality that people did not produce, remix and borrow much at that time; innovative teachers had websites and projectors were just seeing the light in the education system, the headlines regarding Napster’s copyright infringement had just begun to appear.  At this time, society was much more involved in the consumption rather than the production of media.  Yet currently by placing documents online and creating media we are not only leaving a digital footprint but a record of any possible copyright infringement.

One of the current issues with the internet is that finding material is so easy.  We no longer wish to reinvent the wheel, everything is at our disposal.  Unless you know about stock images, how to check copyrights, or verify the creative commons licence of the material, it is very tempting, in the rush that often accompanies creating support material, to simply “copy-paste” a picture or a passage, which might lead to an infringement of copyright law.  Although often curious about the true law, wondering whether the 10% golden rule teachers in my district adlibbed to was truly valid, I was often scared away from reading it in its entirety by the legalese found in the document.   For the longest time I would reinvent the wheel, choosing pictures and documents I knew were safe, never posting a PowerPoint that was not my own creation. I attempted to manage my digital footprint, knowing very well that in today’s society that was almost impossible to fully do.  Yet there are many aspects of digital citizenship that I am not aware of, aspect the Digital Tattoo program did a wonderful job at explaining.  I had never heard about the term Clickjacking or the manners in which it was done, although I have seen it, or the impact of it.  I guess to a certain extent it is this concept of digital footprint and not fully understanding how it works, that kept me away from the allure of social media.  However, it is now expected that you participate and a person who doesn’t have a digital footprint is often automatically judged as having something to hide; the social pressure to join and actively participate are quite high and the consequences can be devastating

As society becomes consumer and producer of media, we need to carefully consider the concept of digital authorship.  This change in our behavior and use pattern of media has generated immense digital footprints and a need to. In my opinion, review and “modernize” copyright law.  At our school we have a specific course segment on digital citizenship covered in English grade 7 and our grade 9 students receive a visit from a police officer warning of identity theft and online predators.  However with the ever changing technology, more should be in place to ensure that the students fully understand the issue at hand; these have all been structured around protecting the student yet not about copyright.   Digital citizenship and copyright laws need to be up-to-date with the current technology and the manner in which that technology is being used.   Information needs to be easily accessible to all (students and adults) and written in a manner that the users of the media can understand.  The rules, regulations and guidelines regarding digital citizenship and copyright need to be presented in a manner that 1) clearly addresses the producers and consumers of media, 2) makes the producers and consumers of media aware that these rules, regulations and guidelines  truly concerns their use of media and technology, and 3) can easily be adlibbed to.

 

Below is an article I found very interesting when taking ETEC 531

Philip, K. (2005). What is a technological author? The pirate function and intellectual property. Postcolonial Studies, 8(2), 199-218.

On Digital Footprints and Copyright

On Digital Footprints

I wonder about how we are going to perceive “digital footprints a decade or two from now. I remember begin very concerned over a decade ago about my digital footprint. I tried to be diligent about monitoring what information about me was (easily) available on the web and where I left my overt presence. I realized as I thought about this question, that my perceptions about my digital footprint have shifted. Somewhere along the way, I became less concerned about some aspects of what is available. I think this has to do with the shear challenge of trying to monitor something in the work I do. The recognition of the shift for me makes me wonder about the perceptions and attitudes of younger people today who grew up in a digital world very different from the one I was in for the first 20 years of my life (the first time I used a computer was in my mid-twenties). I venture to guess that the concept of a digital footprint (in the context of what info might be available about them) will mean even less to them a decade from now.

I am still thoughtful about what I say however. I try to imagine if I could defend any online utterance 20 or thirty years from now. I see this a slightly different discussion than the information that is available about me. We are increasingly trying to help students understand that the nature of digital world makes records of our choices in ways that they often to not yet understand. These are important discussions to have. However, there is a sense of loss in this. While it is important to help students understand that we need to be accountable for our actions and words, I wonder about the effect on people when we fear that everything we do or say may come back to haunt us in the future.

On Copyright

This is an apropos topic this week for a few reasons. First, I was talking today with other educators about some samples of student work that was originally intended to be posted onto a BC Ministry of Education website, and how, some great samples couldn’t be used because the students had used images they had taken from the web without proper permissions. It reminded me of how common that is in so many classes and is not something that I have seen talked about in many elementary classrooms I have been in. If we want our students to be thinking more seriously about copyright as adults, we need to begin the conversations early as they are increasingly immersed in the web in earlier and earlier grades.

Second, I have been in numerous conversations this last year about cultural appropriation with respect to First Nations cultures and knowledge. This topic continues to surface as more BC educators integrate First Peoples content into classrooms. It has been an interesting challenge to help some people understand that there are narratives in First Nations families, communities, or nations that are “owned” by the family, community, or nation, and that permission needs to be given before the narratives can be shared. The only way to help explain this has been to compare that ownership to a form of cultural copyright, and that in First Nations perspectives, that protocol has as much validity as a Canadian copyright law.

Third, I was recently reminded of the need to continue the work about issues of ownership and appropriation with our own colleagues. I am working on a resource development project, and last week a colleague in the project sent me a document that had been sent to him. He said it looked interesting and might be useful for our work. I should take a look at it and let him know. To my surprise the document he had sent was about 90% word for word taken from a blog I wrote, with a few other sentences thrown in. Nowhere on the document was there any indication that the information had been taken from my blog. It was an interesting experience to say the least.

Intellectual Property – International Perspectives

Issues involving copyright and privacy represent an ongoing ethical concern that sometimes takes on an imperialist ‘Old vs. New World’ perspective. It seems that the cultural connotations with beliefs on intellectual property are entangled with value associated with culture and nationality. For example, Asian markets appear to be conducive to the proliferation of copyright violations in many different forms, material and otherwise. By imposing our Western/North American values and perspectives on copyright and intellectual property, we fail to recognize and understand the cultural values that exist and fundamentally impact other cultural markets and economies internationally.

There seems to exist a need to understand educational networks not just for academic reasons, but also to develop an understanding of the social and cultural context that leads to the protection (or not) of intellectual property. These contexts are essential in moving forward with our approaches and dealings towards ethics and jurisprudence as related to technology in both commercial and educational terms. It’s important for our students to understand that technology itself isn’t inherently designed in favour of either positive or negative, good or bad functions and uses, but that ongoing trends of technological innovation and use are shaped by social and cultural considerations that are impacted by examples of meaning and practice that vary internationally.

The implications for education and intellectual property are profound and require careful thought and consideration. If we are viewing the creative and distributive functions of online sharing and learning through a Western/North American perspective, then we are applying our belief and value systems to regions of the world that do not necessarily share the same values and priorities. Is this a direct result of the Western domination and English linguistic superiority of the Internet? When applied to the field of education, these considerations need to be recognized and effectively addressed in order to provide opportunities for students to learn in ways that are personally meaningful (socially and culturally) and relevant while allowing for multiple means of expression. In terms of global learning, Western educators must consider the needs of other regions and cultures internationally, and it should not be assumed that the educational values or perspectives on intellectual property developed in North America will effectively match the interests or needs of students outside of the continent.

Without culture-specific material, there is the legitimate concern that different learning styles internationally may not be compatible with Western (primarily American) creations and developments. The perceived need for opportunities to discuss, collaborate, and argue around opinions and ideas may or may not hold real value in all social contexts and cultures around the globe. In a similar manner, the students in our own classrooms approach discussion and collaboration with different attitudes, both positive and negative. When planning instructional tasks for the classroom, we take the diverse and complex needs and values of our students into account, and the development of perspectives on intellectual property and online sharing should likewise be held to the same accountability.

Our students require (and deserve) personal connections and input into their learning, and the success of online learning is dependent upon the incorporation of relevant social and cultural values, as these values will vary widely across the globe. While the potential for online sharing and protection of intellectual property continues to develop, the success of their regulation hinges on the ability to identify with different cultures and nationalities in order to provide value and significance to diverse learning experiences. This will be no small feat, to be sure.

Grateful for CC

A lot of my own work doesn’t necessarily allow for discussion with the students who take my courses. As I’ve mentioned in previous posts my interaction with the students is usually only through the course material. The materials that I create are self-directed student learning so my influence on student input is fairly minimal. In some of the courses students have an opportunity to post to forums and interact with each other. Although I don’t have a chance to create a direct discussion with the student I do have a chance to communicate expectations through the site policies and the descriptions of every activity.  I’m also required to ensure that I have the rights to use any materials that I include. I do monitor the discussion boards, but I haven’t found any issues related to intellectual property violations yet.

The only way that I could completely ensure that there are no copyright violations would be to shut down the discussion forums and other activities where students create responses. That would result in what I would consider a lower quality program.   I don’t think I’m willing to make that sacrifice at least now. In all likelihood I will need to re-evaluate my decision at some point.  To be honest, I’m a little stuck on what will happen next. I need to keep these self-directed courses with minimal management.

I’m not sure how I feel about the question about cultures having the same view on intellectual property. I guess it depends on your definition of culture. If we’re just referring to legal jurisdictions then yes there are different approaches and attitudes, but I think that the question is probably broader than that. I’m willing to bet that even within our current class there are different opinions on how intellectual property is currently handled.  To be honest on one hand I think that people should be given credit for their ideas and products, but I’m actually really grateful for people that decide to put pictures online for free, or contribute to creative commons projects.

As a bit of an aside, I’m curious if anyone has an opinion on how copyright laws may change in the internet age.  Will a company’s approach copyright and trademarks become less restrictive, or more restrictive?  How will the rise in open source and Creative Commons licences affect the perception of copyrighted material?

Talking About Copyright

I’ve had the opportunity to travel, live, and work in many places around the world. In doing so, I’ve seen many different interpretations of copyright. In some places, Korea in particular, the idea of copyright doesn’t exist. If it exists, you can copy it. The goes for movies, books, software, products, brands. I think I saw a Shrek branded hair salon once that was definitely not official. As you can imagine, it is difficult to keep students from plagiarizing when the idea of intellectual copyright doesn’t exist. Actually, it’s hard enough to keep them from plagiarizing when it does. It takes significant education on what plagiarism is, why it’s wrong, and how to credit ideas.

I think that with the technologies available today, that there really should be some loosening up of copyright law, or even a reimagining. I like that music streaming pay services, like Apple Music and Spotify, are becoming more popular as they represent an adaption to the digital era. I think it is important to have these discussions with students and see how they feel around the issue in the first place.

I think that because of my thoughts and experiences with copyright, I haven’t really had enough discussion about it with my classes. We talk about it with regards to copying work and citing sources in essays but that is about it. I’m also not as strict as I should be when it comes to citing sources in class work, or small assignments. I tend to deal more with it if there is a problem, It could be a good social justice lesson asking if violating copyright is justifiable in other countries or at home and then debating the results and connecting the discussion to personal copyright of students work and online posts.

With regards to my digital footprint, I was lucky enough to receive my undergrad from UBC and we had a few lectures on this. It was enough to ensure that my social media is always something I would be fine with anyone seeing. I know that nothing is private and I do try to impress this upon students. I also make the choice to not allow students on my social media, unless it is being used specifically for school. I like distance from work and personal life. I think it could be interesting to take a look at copyright and how it pertains to social media. What about the lawsuits Pinterest has faced over their link sharing? What about the sharing of misatribited quotes? There is a lot you could do here and it might provide a fun way to reaaly delve into the ideas around copyright.

Digital footprints . . . we definitely need to work on this.

The digital footprint has huge implications for medical professionals. There are many instances where a students/residents/staff have posted things on social media sites that clearly demonstrated unprofessional behaviour and have been reprimanded for it. Below are just two examples I know of:

http://globalnews.ca/news/2471465/miami-doctor-suspended-after-being-caught-on-camera-abusing-uber-driver/

http://globalnews.ca/news/1755000/dalhousie-to-make-statement-about-response-to-offensive-facebook-comments/

The above examples are an important reminder that anything we post on the internet, even though it’s “private, or invitation-only” can become public down the road. As professionals in this digital era, we need to maintain professionalism digitally and personally.

Apparently, some medical schools are looking at digital footprints as part of the admissions process. Although this is still quite controversial.

On the flip side, our footprints can have a huge influence on health literacy and dissemination of health information to the public. For example, for the conditions that I deal with such as urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse, many people don’t seek help because they attribute these conditions to “natural aging” and because they are too embarrassed to seek help. It may also be attributed to the lack of knowledge regarding treatment options. But effective use of social media can help us reach patients and given them reliable information.

As far as I know, our medical school does not teach on digital literacy, digital professionalism or topics surrounding digital footprints. I think these are vital topics that I am currently learning “on the fly”. We are definitely NOT doing enough for our students regarding this topic. I hope that we can implement these topics to teach our students to use social media and digital information correctly, responsibly and professionally. I guess I better go make a meeting with our curriculum committee!

Copyright in Education

Management of digital property in schools is becoming increasingly complex. Students assume that digital resources such as pictures, music, videos and documents are available for their use simply because they are ‘copyable’ resources. Spending time teaching students about who actually owns the property and how to utilize it is tricky. Even companies and  large corporations such as Blackboard and Microsoft cannot agree on the rules or how they should be followed.  Students are not typically trying to do anything illegal, or immoral, they simply assume that share sites such as Limeware are available and therefor useable. Educators need to explain the rules in forms that our students can understand, even at a very young age. Are teachers equipped with the necessary information and resources?

Here are a few resources available to help address this rather complex topic:

Your Digital Presence offers a basic overview and links to documents regarding Canadian Copyright laws in relatively easy to understand language: http://www.2learn.ca/ydp/copyrightabout.aspx

MediaSmarts lesson for grades 7-8 which addresses the relationship between intellectual property, copyright and trademark concepts:  http://mediasmarts.ca/lessonplan/up-and-away

Copyright Matters is a booklet designed to help teachers to understand and deliver accurate content regarding Canadian copyright laws: http://cmec.ca/Publications/Lists/Publications/Attachments/291/Copyright_Matters.pdf

Of particular growing concern is the use of original content for reworking assignments. As digital representations become more popular as a means for sharing knowledge and learning, concerns around this property in classrooms is substantially heightened. I was particularly interested in #13 from the Copyright Matters booklet mentioned above,

“13. Can students and teachers use copyright-protected works to create new works?©

The Copyright Act contains a users’ right permitting anyone, not just students and teachers, to use copyright-protected works to create new works. This users’ right is referred to in the Copyright Act as “non-commercial user-generated content.” This users’ right can be found in section 29.21 of the Copyright Act as amended by the Copyright Modernization Act. The following conditions apply to the creation of non-commercial user-generated content:

1. It can only be used for non-commercial purposes.

2. The original source must be mentioned, if it is reasonable to do so.

3. The original work used to generate the content must have been acquired legally.

4. The resulting user-generated content does not have a “substantial adverse effect” on the market for the original work.

This users’ right permits students to use copyright-protected works to create videos, DVDs, or mash-ups, as long as the conditions above are all met.

The users’ right permits user-generated content created under provision of the Copyright Act to be disseminated. Dissemination includes uses such as posting a video to YouTube or a Web site.”

This excerpt clearly demonstrates the usage laws for content in schools. I was reassured of my own usage and my expectations of my students after reading this.

Overall, it is important for students and teachers to understand is that the rules are more open for educational purposes than for other industries. Bill C-11 allows for the expansion of ‘Fair Dealing’ law which states, “ “Fair Dealing is an exception that permits limited and non commercial copying for specific purposes. Fair Dealing is a user’s right that facilitates creativity and access to information by balancing the restrictions in the Copyright Act.” (2Learn.ca Education society, 2012) to educational means. Education has been included as an exemption in the following categories:

“-Publicly Available Materials on the Internet

-Distance Education

-Cinematographic works

-Reproduction in Class”

(2Learn.ca Education society, 2012)


Education as an expansion category and exempt from some of the restrictions of other industry should be communicated to students. Knowing that the rules that apply to them under and educational standard are different than when they are independently creating works outside the school domain, during their school years or beyond, when they enter the workforce. This difference is largely due to the purpose of educational works, for the greater good, rather than for profit. The spirit of these laws is that if works are properly cited, obtained in a way that is not prevented by protection strategies such as passwords and are used for educational rather than commercial means, generally the use of such resources is permitted.

Teachers should also be well informed. Incorrect use of digital resources whether intentional or not, is a serious issue. Lack of information regarding these laws may result in teachers shying away from using valuable resources. Teachers should demonstrate responsible digital citizenship in their own practice by informing themselves, their students and modelling compliant practices with copyright laws.

Noel, Wanda & Snel, Jordan. (2012) CMEC. Retrieved from: http://cmec.ca/publications/lists/publications/attachments/291/copyright_matters.pdf