> I'm intrigued by "this is a dodgy ruling and could be challenged
> successfully". Until it is challenged, why do we assume the worst?
Well, 'dodgy' is probably not the correct legal term!
However, I've had a problem regarding IPR of student work this
year. A student submitted a website as part of the assessment for
a web design module. This website was found to be a live site for a
small company.
It was obvious that the student had designed the site himself prior
to the module but it isn't right that he should have submitted this as
assessment for the module (is this self-plagiarism?). However by
doing so, the IPR for that site now belongs to the university - I
suppose that in an extreme case, the university could say that any
money resulting from this site should go to them, or they could ask
the company to remove the site. But that then gets even more
complicated as the company presumably paid the student to
create the site...
The IPR regulation is more important when it comes to postgrad
work, where it is possible that the work could bring in a lot of
money, for example, where software is developed.
Verity
*************************
Dr E V Brack
Access & Flexible Learning Development Officer
Institute for Lifelong Learning
University of Sheffield
196-8 West Street
SHEFFIELD S1 4ET
tel: +44 (0)114 222 7085
fax: +44 (0)114 222 7001
e-mail: [log in to unmask]
*************************************************************************
You are subscribed to the JISC Plagiarism mailing list. To Unsubscribe, change
your subscription options, or access list archives, visit
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/PLAGIARISM.html
*************************************************************************
|