Fair enough. My employer makes similar assertions of ownership over
things I create in the course of my work. There's owning and there's
owning, however. Lulu certainly has the right to access any email I
may send with my account. Email is a semi-public form of
communication in any case, but they would not have the right (e.g.)
to prevent me from printing an email I had written on the grounds
that I was violating their copyright. I do not alienate any of my
own rights to my communications by using their systems. Ideas, such
as the cure for cancer, are not copyrightable in any case, though I
imagine my employer might have some interest in patenting such a
thing, should I happen to mention it :-).
After reviewing the policy you linked, I don't think your email is
really (c) Oxford University in fact. They only assert that they
have the right to read it, which they do, since they own the means of
communication and you're storing it on their servers. They can't
prevent you from copying, forwarding, printing it, etc.
I don't think there's much case law regarding email copyrights, in
fact. I know there have been instances where Usenet users have
objected to their posts being archived on Google. The basis for such
an objection would certainly be copyright. But I believe Google just
removes their posts when people complain.
Hugh
On Apr 19, 2006, at 4:59 PM, James Cummings wrote:
> Hugh A. Cayless wrote:
>> James, does Oxford really assert ownership over your email? How
>> horrible! I can strike that one off my list of places I'd like
>> to work then :-).
>
>
> Hugh,
>
> They don't need to. As with any other company where email is used
> in the course of your job duties, they already own the email. In
> reality, they do not attempt to assert ownership over my email, but
> reserve the right to exercise control over it, including examining
> it, in certain circumstances.[1] Very few companies and certainly
> less academic institutions actually have a vested interest in
> examining their employees email. (To do it properly takes too much
> time and effort.)
>
> There are, I believe, companies who have taken disciplinary action
> against employees based on the contents of their email. Email is
> not private, and if sent from your place of employment in the
> course of your work is not owned by you. The same is true of most
> other works produced in the same context. The University of Oxford
> has a clear IPR policy and kindly does not assert copyright over
> some things (artistic works, books, articles, plays, lyrics,
> scores, or lectures) if they are not commissioned by the
> university. Equally, they do claim copyright over all sorts of
> things, including lots of computer-related works, but not emails
> specifically which are probably exempt because they wouldn't be
> "reasonably considered to possess commercial potential".[2] But if
> I wrote an email from work which contained the cure for the common
> cold, or cancer, then they might decided to change their mind and
> assert that copyright (which they would be legally allowed to do.)
>
> So, if you are going to strike off any company/institution which
> actually owns their employees email, then you'll be quite busy
> striking things off. If you only strike off those which explicitly
> choose to assert that ownership (rather than silently retaining
> their rights to do so in the future), then you'll not have to
> strike as many off. ;-)
>
> I encourage everyone to read their own institution's Intellectual
> Property Rights policy, and their employment contract. ;-)
>
> -James
> [1] http://www.admin.ox.ac.uk/statutes/regulations/196-052.shtml
> [2] http://www.admin.ox.ac.uk/statutes/790-121.shtml
> (As you may have noticed, I am not a lawyer, and this does not
> constitute legal advice.)
|