Okay. Okay. Yeah. So let's get started
. Uh, we're going to talk about copyright.
We'll talk through, um, some facts about open
licensing through Creative Commons. Look at some actual creative
Commons licenses. How to use this kind of work
. In other words, how to attribute finding openly
license work, which is a little bit tricky.
And then, um, why, you might consider
uh huh. Openly licensing work that you create.
How many of you are familiar with the division between
what can be copyrighted and what cannot be copyrighted?
Okay. All right. So, um, there
are works that can be copyrighted. They tend to
be creative works. There are original works. They
are fixed. Works, Um, works that cannot
be copyrighted. Include common knowledge ideas. Um,
facts, For example, who is the president of
the United States? Who was the 35th president of
the United States? This information, as well as
measures and standards cannot be methods cannot be copyrighted.
Some of those things can be patented. Uh,
processes can be patented. Uh huh. So a
very large number of things on both sides, some
that can, and some that cannot be copyrighted.
Um, how many of your copyright holders. Okay
, so how many of you have written have taken
pictures, okay, and maybe written, you know
, a letter or a summary of some of your
work in class or some of your work for teaching
. Okay, so you have created original work,
so you are, by default a copyright holder.
Um, even, um though maybe you might not
know it when I tell students this, they get
very excited thinking. Oh, we're copyright holders.
This is That's really, really exciting. So as
a copyright holder, as a copyright owner, you
have the exclusive right to do all of these things
with your work for your lifetime. And your heirs
carry that, um, privilege for 70 years after
you pass. Um, so you have the exclusive
right to reproduce, to distribute, to perform,
display, transmit and create derivative works. Of course
, I can ask you when I do this with
your work, or I can find an exemption in
the law, or I can do a fair use
analysis, which may give me permission to use that
use your work. So this should actually say employee
VT employees. But, um, as employees of
the university, you're also bound by policy 13,000.
Um, and this means that you own the copyright
to your work. But the university retains certain rights
, um, to free use in teaching research extension
forever. So the works that you create as an
employee, um, are something that the university may
use, um, in teaching research, etcetera.
This is not something that tends to be instituted.
Uh, there's no place where where actually, there
is a place, the institutional repository. But there
isn't a standard place where faculties say I'm going to
put all of my things here so everyone can use
them. Um, when faculty want to share,
we'd love to see more of that. Uh,
yeah. Anyway, I'll just stop stop there with
that idea. We can come back to that if
you like. So, um, as an employee
, um, you own the copyright unless you sign
your rights away. So if you have published had
a book published by commercial publisher, you've published a
journal article. Um, chances are that you have
been asked to that you've been asked to give away
some of your rights or all of your copyrights for
work. So if you have done that, that
means that you've lost control of that work, you
would have to treat it like any other work.
If you want to use it in your class,
if you want to upload it to scholar, if
you want to put it on your website. So
if this is an interest, I'd love to talk
with you later about it. But we suggest that
authors, um submit an author Dunham and try to
negotiate these rights with publishers to retain some of their
rights. Um, so that you can use the
work that you've created, um, so that you
can share the work that you've created, according to
, um, What what you're hoping to do with
it also. All right, so in, um
, the U. S. And I should say
at this point, I am not an attorney,
just not legal advice. Um, in the U
. S. Works are divided into three basic categories
. So public domain public domain is where copyrighted works
go when they have are no longer copyrighted. Materials
that are published prior to 1923 are in the public
domain. Most U. S. Government works.
If, for example, if you worked for the
National Park Service and part of your job was to
take pictures. Those pictures would be in the public
domain. Not all U S. Government works are
in the public domain because there are a lot of
contracting, Um, Texas situations where someone is not
a government employee and they're creating works for the government
. Anyway, um, so their works by copyright
, that are owned by someone else and works that
are protected by copyright that are owned by you.
Because you've either retain copyright or, um, you
have, um you have not allowed anyone else to
use it. How many of you are in the
classroom from time to time? Thanks. So s
And then how many of you publish things from time
to time? Right. Okay, good. We
have a good mix, so teachers and authors may
want to use somebody else's material. You might want
to use an image. You may want to use
a quote. You might want to, um,
display something in a presentation. Either at the university
or in public. You might want to transmit a
clip, an audio clip or a video clip.
You might want to create derivatives of something. Um
, what are what are the steps were for doing
this. So there are several ways that we can
legally respond. Um, first is to obtain permission
. Um, that's not Doesn't just mean ask for
permission. It means get permission. So, um
, you can obtain permission. Sometimes this is difficult
. It takes time. Um, you can identify
an exempt or a fair use under U. S
copyright law, and I should mention that there's a
fair use workshop. If you're interested in how to
do a fair use analysis, there's a workshop coming
up in March or you can identify an exempt use
. There are all kinds of, um, exemptions
. There are many exemptions for face to face teaching
, and there are exemptions in distance learning. There's
some exemptions for libraries, exemptions for architectural works.
We suggest that if you choose to use copyrighted work
that you maintain documentation. What exemption were you thinking
? I'm using this exemption when you were when you
decided to use the work. Um, so we're
not going to go in great detail into fair use
into these particular exemptions, because it's not our focus
, but that's I was wondering if you were planning
to talk at all about copyrighted works where you can
actually get in touch with or identify people's copyright right
? Orphan works is what they tend to be called
, and that is an ongoing problem. The US
Copyright Office is addressing actively working on what to do
. I don't have an answer for you, but
that's definitely I Thank you for bringing up that issue
. That's definitely a problem right now. When you
can't find a person or you know who the person
is and they have no errors, you don't basically
, as far as I know, the way the
law stance is that you cannot use the work without
permission, even if there's no one to ask permission
from. So, um, okay, a few
other solutions that our legal ways to respond um,
you can link to material that is, um,
subscribed by the library. You can put your own
material or library material on reserve or the reserve.
Uh huh. Libraries enjoy special dispensation from, uh
, within US copyright law, so libraries are allowed
to create reserves to upload materials to to our servers
. Um, this is not the same as uploading
content to scholar. Um, if you want to
upload content to scholar, we would really suggest you
start with using library resources, and then, if
you feel like that's insufficient, um, come talk
to us. We can show you how to do
a fair use analysis. It's not something we can
do for you. Um, but we can show
you how to do it and how to make the
decision regarding what is fair and what's infringing. Um
, so forth. Way to legally respond. Use
material from the public domain. And fifth way,
use openly licensed material. How many of you are
familiar with open, open licensing? Okay. All
right. So a little bit, um what is
open licensing? Um, this is a six minute
video. It's really fun. It's openly licensed.
Um, and I'm going to show it to you
because it explains in six minutes. Um, what
I would take 20 minutes to explain, and it's
really fun. So we're going to take a little
detour for this. Sorry about that. Yeah,
there's my my big screen. Okay. Yeah.
Okay. These are Jack and make quite also known
as the White Surprise. They're a band from Detroit
. They make rock and roll without a bass guitarist
. Mhm. This is speaking McDonald veteran band Red
Cross. Steve thought White Stripes could use a bass
player, so he appointed himself. He took the
website album or point blood cells, and we recorded
it, laying a bass track down on every song
. Then he released the results as MP three's on
Red Cross, his website. He even made up
a new album, Cover and title read. Let's
Have MacDonald began putting these copyrighted songs online without permission
from the White Stripes for their record label. During
the project, he bumped into Jack White, who
gave him spoken assent to continue. It can be
that easy when you skip the intermediaries collaboration across space
and time created co authorship with people you've never met
standing on the shoulders of your peers. It's what
the Internet is all about. It can be that
easy. Skip Intermediate. Okay, but couldn't it
be easier? Still, not many of us are
liable just to talk into Jack White and get the
green light. And he's not gonna let just anyone
play the bass over his songs in any case.
But what about other artists who might want even for
me to play along? Shouldn't we be able to
if they don't mind. Enter one of the Internet's
most famous citizens. Face familiar the world over a
public identity rivaled only by a handful of corporate giants
and global superstars. A big copyright. C.
Everyone knows what Big C stands for Big C means
all rights reserved. Big C Means asked permission.
Big C protects copyright owners and notifies the rest of
us of their own ship. Time was when you
had to put a big C on anything we wanted
copyright or else it entered the public domain, the
Commons of Information, where nothing is owned and all
is permitted. You have to put the world on
notice to one that was Pixies job, and it
was a useful one. What changed the law?
By the late 19 eighties, U. S law
had changed so that works become copyrighted automatically the moment
they're made. The moment you hit save on that
research paper. The second shut up snaps closed.
The instant you let your pen from that cocktail napkin
doodle, your creation is copyrighted. Where the big
C makes a cameo or not. So suddenly there's
no quick way of knowing whether something's owned or not
. The new rules make it clear about how you
get to own work. You don't have to do
anything, but they say nothing at all about how
you should go about announcing that you want to allow
certain uses of your work. So what? Well
, if you're a digital filmmaker whose every frame must
be cleared by an army of lawyers before making a
cut, or if you're in a band whose label
won't let you put a song on a file sharing
network, or if you're a professor trying to put
together online course materials or if you're a DJ chasing
down permission to use every snippet of song in your
sonic collage, if you're one of these people,
then you know so what we interrupt this brainstorm to
call the lawyers. You drop what you're doing and
call all the lawyers. You asked for permission.
Even use the word Author doesn't mind if you use
it because you have no idea what the authors in
10 years you ask for permission, even share some
of your rights or you venture forward, unsure what
your risks and rights are exactly, or in a
haze of legal talent, you do nothing. The
bottom line. Big C is out of a job
. A little men are not mhm. Enter Creative
Commons. Creative Commons wanted to find an easy way
to help people tell the world up front that they
want to allow some uses of their work. We
call the experts the U. S Copyright Office for
advice. Their response. There's no real answer.
Get creative. So we've got a creative how our
CC brand marks works but are governed by Creative Commons
licenses instead of standardized copyright licenses available free of charge
on our website, we wrote these licenses so that
lawyers and courts could read them. Then we translated
them into a language you can read, and then
we translated them into language. Computers can be now
see, see is meant for people to calculate.
But the count it allows you to retain your copyright
while granting the World Commission to make certain uses of
it upon certain conditions. If the big seems like
a red light, then CC is a green light
. But the Big C says no trespassing. Double
C says, Please come in. If the big
C says all rights reserved, Sisi says, some
rights reserved so you can use the powers of the
Net to find works free to share and build upon
and to invite other people to transform or trade yours
so that you can get creative Not only what you
make, how you make it available so you can
collaborate across space and time. So you can be
a co author with someone you've never met. So
you can stand on the shoulders of your peers all
without asking permission. Because permission has already been granted
Creative Commons get created. It's easy when you skip
the intermediate. Yeah. Okay. I love to
hear your thoughts on that. I think first of
all, it's really fun. Um, what was
striking to you? What was new? Yes,
I asked Jack Would Was the song I was?
Yeah. Points. Uh huh. Mhm. Good
. Good. Comment? Yes. In that case
was also a verbal permission. So on the line
. Uh huh. Document. This is a very
These are very advanced remarks. Yes. Okay.
Yeah. Good. So documentation did the person actually
own the work? Who gave permission to use it
? Good questions, Other thoughts? Yes. I
didn't know that the second hit save or whatever that
it's automatically cooperate your video? Uh huh, Yeah
, yeah, That's, um, that's how it
works. It's pretty amazing. So everything from your
grocery list two notes that you might take during a
meeting are copyrighted, unless you say otherwise. So
it's great on one hand, and on another hand
, it's, um, difficult. If most of
the things that we create our copyrighted in questions,
I'm curious. If you have copyrighted works that you
retain all the rights to and you want to move
to a creative Commons license, what you would have
to do is there anything except create a new version
of it that has been Creative Commons. Information on
that is what you would have to do. If
you own all the rights, then it is yours
to do what you would like with it. It's
just the people who might have all Pepper. They
wouldn't know. I get the same question when people
say, if I release something with the C C
. A Creative Commons license on it and there are
several different kinds will look at the different licenses.
Can I take the license off? And the answer
is sort of, but not really, um,
those items that are out there, um, that
you've openly licensed that people have. They are free
to redistribute them and to do all of the things
that you found so that they could do. But
in your new copy, you can put a copyright
notice on it. There's a book company that's actually
done this called Flat World that moved from a Creative
Commons license back to charge to copyrighting their material and
charging for it as a way to have a more
sustainable business model. Very controversial. Oh, action
, of course. But no. Any other thoughts
? One of the things that people tell me when
they see this video is Oh, So instead of
the sea, do we put the CC on on
the work? Um, the work is still copyrighted
. You still own it, but you would make
mention of which license you've added. You've applied to
the work and you'll see these in a number of
places. Sometimes you'll see just the logo. Um
, sometimes you'll just see one of these logos.
Um, sometimes you'll see. You'll see them written
out, for example, of the work will say
, this work is licensed with an attribution only four
point Oh no, license. Um, so these
are really just three ways of talking about the licenses
, the picture, the attribution license or the nickname
, as I like to call it, um CC
by Sisi by s A So I'd like to show
you, um, these are the six elements.
Sorry. The four elements, um, that make
up the licenses. All of them have the attribution
element this allows people to copy, distribute, display
, perform there. There's some familiar. All those
things that you were your exclusive rights as a copyright
owner these address and say please do this. Um
, the other ones, um, will somehow limit
how open something is. Um, if you say
no derivative works, that means someone can copy and
distribute your work, but they can't change anything.
Can't change the font. They can't translate it.
Um, they can't change the graphics. Um,
it has to stay as is. So that's That's
a kind of an equivalent to free online. Um
, except most most things free online. Er anyway
, retract. Um, that's the most limited one
. No derivative course. Um, Cheryl Lake requires
you if you are embedding somebody's work in your own
to share your created work with the same license.
Um, and then noncommercial doesn't apply to a whether
or not you work in a company, but it
applies to whether or not you're actually making money off
of something. So these are combined into six different
licenses. The top four are considered open licenses.
The bottom two are not considered to not be open
licenses. So the top license being the most open
license allows you, allows you telling others or others
telling you you can distribute this you can remix tweak
. You can build on this, but you have
to credit me. You can also make money off
of it. Um, which is a really kind
of novel thing that people would give their work away
, Um, and allow others to make money off
of it. The books that you see over here
are actually licensed CC by, um, I think
that the the the publisher, which is out of
Rice University, um, the open stacks college program
, um believes that none of the commercial publishers will
come along and put their cover on on the works
and sell it because probably they have already done that
. Um, but they have a lot of really
interesting partnerships. As a result of the CCB license
, they can work with commercial partners. Um,
a little bit more limited is the CC by s
A. This tells people, okay, you can
do all the things that you can do with the
CCB license you must attribute. But if you create
something, you have to share it with the same
license. So cc by SA means that your work
, which is derived from there's, needs to have
the same license. Any questions about the S A
. Okay, um, since he by M.
C um, you can share it. Uh,
this tells people that you want them to their allowed
to modify, to redistribute, to display, perform
. Um, but they can't make money off of
it, so kind of shuts the door on that
. And then, um, the noncommercial share,
like is a combination of of the two immediately above
licenses. So this reinforces, um, the non
commercial and the okay to make derivatives, but not
in a commercial sort of way. Um, these
are really complicated to think through. Um, I
think the main takeaway I would have you walk away
with for this is to know that each of these
require attribution. You need to say, What is
the name of the work that you used? If
you, uh, are exciting, something with the
CC by or you're reusing something. What license was
it under And ideally, where you found it.
Mhm So and then the last two are no derivatives
and non commercial, No derivatives. Um, So
how do you cite something like this? You can
cite it in a really messy way. So this
is the title of the work Copyright camp by gross
Great Gross. Meyer. Here's where the link is
. Here is the name of a license. Here
is the link for the license. Okay, that's
pretty ugly. So I would rather use copyright camp
with the hyper linked the author's name and then the
type of license with the hyperlink back to the license
. Um, that gives us all the information we
would need to find. The original work credits the
author as they wanted to be credited. And it
tells people on what the licenses that you under which
you use this the second license. Our second forum
video works, though if you've got it online.
Yeah, credit for that person, right? Yeah
, because otherwise, particularly the link to where you
got the original. You can you should. Did
you see some people site found in flicker? Or
, um, I think the best practice is to
use all of the information rather than not a lot
of people ask, Where do I include this?
Okay, put it where your works cited or your
bibliography or your list of references. Um, is
, um, if you're using a medium that uses
this kind of that format, um, do you
have an audio medium? Put it at the beginning
, but at the end, are you creating an
image? You can go in the caption go at
the end of a document. If your images embedded
in the document, um, you can put it
in credits of the film. Um, so lots
of different places where to put these this credit?
Um, one other thing. I, I think
it's hopeful, is to know that there are three
different levels of layers of licenses. There's one that
is legally defensible. There's one that is plain language
, and there's a machine readable version. Um,
the reason that you might want to make things machine
readable is so that people can find them. So
there is no one central place for openly licensed work
. People ask this. Where do I go?
Where's the one place? And there isn't a one
place. There are many different places. Uh huh
. So if you are creating openly license works,
make sure that their machine readable and they will be
easier for other people to find and use. Um
, so that brings us to where Where do I
find these kinds of things? What's available? Oh
, many types of media, um, images sound
, um, moving pictures. Texts, of course
. The example of, um, textbooks over here
. Um, simulations, interactive materials. There are
a lot of educational resources that are openly licensed.
Um, some of my favorites are looking at images
through on flicker. People have put up some really
beautiful things. Um, if you go to this
top page, which is search dot creative commons dot
org and I'll make sure you have a link to
this presentation. Um, you can use the different
licenses. You can check the boxes at the top
to say what kind of license you want, and
then in the box, you type what you're looking
for, and click on any of the buttons for
the type of source you want to look for,
and it will automatically do the search for you.
Um, so as I mentioned, there's music if
you have students or you yourself like to put background
music on slide shows or, um, presentations or
you just really love music. And, um,
you want to to combine? Um, certain bits
of music. There are people who are openly licensing
music. There are universities that are openly licensing courseware
. This is useful if you're teaching and you want
to see how somebody else taught the material or you
want to see what they aside, What kind of
assessments did they, um, did they give to
their students? And as you see on the very
bottom, you can see the creative Commons license.
Um, CC by NC s A. Um,
these are really fun. How many of you are
kind of amateur science geeks? Anyone? Okay,
thank you for for being Yeah, mhm open to
talk about that. All right, so I just
want to show this to you, because I think
it's really fun. Um, and this is one
of my favorite ones, But if you if you
know something about or you're interested in, um,
finding out about how concentrated something is, You could
add some of the Kool Aid to, um,
this water, and then you can see what level
of concentration Um, it has. And if it's
too concentrated, you can add more water. Or
if it's not concentrated enough, you can evaporate some
of the water. And when you're done, you
can serve up your Kool Aid. Um, so
this is a really fun, um, really fun
interactive example. It's relatively simple. They get a
lot more complex to the degree that I do not
understand. Um, do you have a Do you
have a comment? Yes. You can serve it
up with your three. I don't know if they
print liquids yet, I guess. I guess we
don't know that to me. Um, yeah.
So, um, you can find Creative Commons license
materials in YouTube. Of course, there are openly
licensed textbooks, um, different places to find them
. Um, if you're attending any of the open
Education Week events, um, the Thursday and Friday
events are all led by folks from the open textbook
library at the University of Minnesota. um, there
are. These probably are the three major places to
look for English language, openly licensed materials. Um
, Marlowe is from California state system. Joram is
from the U K and O er comments is actually
, um, the organization that that now hosts the
National Science Digital Library content so you can find that
content there as well. Um, Google also has
an advanced search feature called Usage Rights. Um,
which maps? It doesn't tell you. These are
creative Commons licenses, but, um, they map
to the CC licenses, um, so you can
find open resources that you can reuse and in many
cases, edit. Um, so let's talk about
briefly about a definition. Um, when I know
that we're talking about open licensing, um, broadly
, um, we talk sometimes about open educational resources
. Um, those would be resources that span a
really wide range of types of works, everything from
courses to course materials, modules, textbooks, some
kinds of software videos. Other tools are considered to
be educational, so it's almost anything and but the
key is that the materials either need to reside in
the public domain or they need to have an open
license affixed to them be somehow marked so that you
know what you're looking at. Um, I would
love to just stop here and, um, hear
from you about how you think he's what you might
look for what you create that you might share,
uh, or ideas that you have about what might
be some possible applications of these concepts. So and
thoughts? Yes. Oh, warrior. What is
the border between noncommercial and commercial, for example,
with anything with the music of genital isn't always,
um, things that are used in the classroom are
, by definition, on commercial. Ah, I
think one of the biggest questions that I get is
Well, one of the questions I get is whether
or not someone can do a lecture, be paid
and use creative Commons materials. And because they're making
money off of their presentation, I think it falls
outside of non commercial use. Um, anytime there's
money evolved, um, with regard to fundraising.
Mhm. Yeah, my sense is that everybody on
the right, but but they're part of a nonprofit
organization. Is that where you, um Well,
what is the specific activity? Yes. You're being
paid to teach. You're being paid in a nonprofit
setting. This is your part of your work,
but you're not. University enjoys a non. We're
not a for profit company, right? So I
guess an example of a non profit company who is
making money off of this and could not use Creative
Commons for that for a particular reason would be someone
who wants to use images for fundraising purposes or something
like that where there's a direct exchange of cash,
that kind of commercial better. Uh huh. So
, yes, I recognize the university does have we
have a business model. We have to bring money
in and pay people and retain employees. And that's
probably not as clear cut as you like. Uh
huh. So I can look more into that.
If you want to talk about details, yes,
there's a lot of fair use with education for video
, and you can use it carries mhm. Mhm
. So that would be copyrighted material that you would
need to apply a fair use analysis to, um
, the openly licensed things I need to think about
whether or not the open license trumps the copyright in
case in a case where you want to use something
under fair use I'm not sure about that. So
other thoughts. How would you use these kinds of
things? So in the work that I do publishing
, yeah, conferences and journals and, uh,
the Yeah, Yeah, it's that open access seven
things part of it. Because, as you said
earlier, we are often asked to sign away rights
moving using your panties. And yet we provide materials
like the in some sense, the editorial Reverend neighbors
. And ultimately, once upon a time, they
actually produce the books. But they don't do that
because it's all online. So there's very little that
the publishers provide. So I'm interested again. Um
, I know this is the right moment I'm interested
in and hearing your view on the aspect to people's
respect. One that arguments is off is that there's
still in credibility gap people, publishing menus and things
like that. So we can just Hmm. Um
, sure. Okay. With regard to I think
I probably know more about the book side than the
journal side right now. And the colleagues who are
talk with you for hours about the journal side.
Some of the open publishing houses employ. They will
pay their authors. They will pay their reviewers and
have a very strict Uh huh. Quality control process
for the protection of of some openly license works are
created by one person, and they view it more
as of open source code like here it is.
It's unfinished. Add to fix it, Change it
, make it better. Mm. It depends on
the source. He was One other aspect out of
her window is the fact that so much shouldn't be
tenure review process. Abusive. Mhm quality publications.
Yes, yes. And so there's. Right now
, the system appears to be stacked against open sense
that not recognize this in my field. Yes,
okay, open publishing venues that will give you.
I think that's changing. There are a number of
Julie if you want to jump in. I couldn't
hear. Oh, he's asking about the journal publishing
environment, the open journal publishing environment, whether or
not open journals are competitive in terms of quality with
commercial journals, quality of peer review. So my
point is a little bit different in the sense that
because we are the referees, the we do all
of the quality assurance that aspect of it and the
publishing houses are the ones that actually became the copyright
because they have done so. They came from the
old regime where they did provide services and it did
do a lot. They've got the statute in other
words, for instance, publishing in nature. So
they've got the statutes published in nature. That's a
big deal. It's a big deal. Other others
as well. And yet a lot of them have
Priest Draconian. Take all your rights to produce starting
so I'd like to see it would be more open
and more fair. Obviously, I'm not precluding the
fact that they find a business model where they can
building on it, make the night they want me
. But right now it's very much backed against the
wall. Yeah. Uh, yeah, I don't
really break out solutions. Students are finding workarounds,
but I think their response to the high textbook costs
indicates that there is the problem. Um, and
so one of the things that we're exploring is whether
or not there are some alternatives for some of the
courses that we teach here at Tech, where we
could save students money either by adopting replacing an existing
textbook with something that's open, um, replacing an
existing text book with something that's not a textbook with
discrete learning objects and text and journal articles and these
types of things or supplementing, of course, with
openly licensed material is a way to, uh,
use this kind to kind of dip your toe in
the water and see Is this okay? So that's
another application beyond the not having to do a fair
use analysis and then the the first application. I
would argue that these kinds of materials are much more
flexible than commercially licensed materials because you can Uh huh
, digitize them can distribute them. You can change
them. You can change the images, change the
examples, change the problem sets. You can change
the formatting, whatever it takes to be a pedagogical
, creative, um, person, uh, instructor
in in your course you can do with these kinds
of materials. So I think that's an opportunity that
we don't often talk about. The the student savings
numbers can be huge of seeing numbers anywhere from$60,000
saved by university, up to$2 million saved by
a university for adopting open license and open licensed materials
in place of partial textbooks. So those are staggering
, but I think even more than there's a possibility
for learning innovation here and for publishing innovation. Two
. To publish some of these materials using other people's
, you know, pulling in other people's works.
Exciting them, of course, but to not have
to reinvent the wheels. Oh, we're talking about
these concepts more. There are some faculty who have
adopted or who have authored openly licensed materials for their
classes. They're here tomorrow, Um, and at
3. 30 between 3. 30 and six for
a panel discussion and a time of being able to
chat with other folks who are interested in the same
same ideas. Um, And then before that,
we're going to hear from some students, Um,
12. 15 tomorrow, um, hear from students
regarding their experience buying textbooks. What do they do
? What did they spend? What kind of impact
did that have on them? Do they have to
get a second job? Did they decide to go
without what happened? As a result of that,
they do something illegal to get their content. What
? What was their experience? And how can we
, uh, encourage both there? How do we
encourage their learning and meet the needs and address the
needs that they have. So thank you very much
for your time. Um, I would love to
chat with you afterwards, and it's for a time
. Yeah, yes. Uh huh. Doesn't mean
that you pay work and you make available via becomes
what recourse do you have? You discover it's not
being used in different, right? Um well,
the the licenses are legally binding because they are written
in legalese. In addition to human, readable is
what they call, um, so similar to a
copyright infringement situation. You would have to sue the
infringer, so there's not a easy way to do
either. But that's the only do settlement you're going
to get is your loss of income. So there's
no associated loss of income. There's no point suing
and that directly But you can contact save GSP and
say this is not being used in accordance with the
license. Can you go? Because I think they
would honor the owner. I think they would honor
that because you do have a legal um, you've
clearly licensed your work. Mhm. I believe so
. Well, I know it is. The question
is whether it's respected the same way. Is there
a lot of recipes that pay no attention to you
and you say this is rights to it? My
guess is it's respect. One more. No less
than copyrighted sounds. Does everybody? Yeah, I
think that's probably fair assumption. Mhm. All right
, well, thank you. Hope to see you
later on this week. And there are other people
talking besides me, so Yeah, thank you very 752 00:47:29.639 --> A:middle L:90% much.