Copyright Scenarios
Conflict of Interest - Faculty Matters
What happened:
Arthur Miller, a distinguished Harvard University Law professor,
videotaped his lectures and sold them to Concord University.
Law students at Concord paid for and used these on-line lectures
for course work. Miller did not inform Harvard University
administrators or ask permission. Miller reasoned that since
he did not provide any interaction or service to the students
at who were taking classes at Concord, and since he made the
videotapes in accordance with Harvard’s guidelines concerning
consulting and outside employment, his actions were permissible.
Harvard disagreed. Harvard Law professor Charles Nesson said
that "Harvard is a residential institution with an education
that is based on face-to-face contact, participation in a
community of scholars, and quality credentials. Concord's
program is like watching television. It's a totally degraded
form of legal education. Concord wants Arthur because they
want to associate Concord with Harvard. It's a dilution of
the Harvard name."
Outcome:
Copyright law gives rights of ownership of works-for-hire
to the employer. However, in many cases alternate agreements
have been reached. Traditionally, universities hold to “works-for-hire”
for staff but not for faculty. Secondary school systems traditionally
hold to “works-for-hire” for all employees.
In this particular case, the primary issue between Harvard
and Professor Miller was not about copyright because Harvard
did not claim ownership of the taped lectures. Instead, it
was about whether Miller could “moonlight” his
services to another university. This incident led Harvard
administrators to create a conflict-of-interest policy specific
to online teaching that allows it to protect the institution’s
reputation and financial interests. For an interesting Wall
Street Journal article about the incident, click
here.
Back to the Scenarios
page
|
