There are an increasing number of organisations which have indicated that their output is Creative Commons by default, however there are not as many that have a public IP policy which clearly allows staff to publish "their" work.
i.e. We have moved from the IP policy being the stick used to prevent openness, and the "work for hire" and "publish process" are the next frontier.
A few staff at University of Canberra (UC) have written an IP policy proposal which clearly gives staff ownership of their work, and requires CC licensing if their staff use organisational infrastructure to create their work.
http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/University_of_Canberra/Proposed_policy_on_int...
Otago Polytechnic adopted an IP policy like that in 2007.
http://wikieducator.org/Otago_Polytechnic/Intellectual_property
Are there other examples, within or outside academia, where the organisation empowers its staff by providing a policy which clarifies when "work for hire" principle is enforced in this murky world of online collaboration?
Does the WMF have an intellectual property policy for works created by WMF employees? Employees edit and upload using free licenses under their own name, but does the copyright belong to the employee or to the WMF?
Is anyone in our community going to:
Global Congress on Intellectual Property and the Public Interest
Washington College of Law American University, Washington, DC August 25-27, 2011
http://infojustice.org/public-events/global-congress
On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 8:55 PM, John Vandenberg jayvdb@gmail.com wrote:
There are an increasing number of organisations which have indicated that their output is Creative Commons by default, however there are not as many that have a public IP policy which clearly allows staff to publish "their" work.
i.e. We have moved from the IP policy being the stick used to prevent openness, and the "work for hire" and "publish process" are the next frontier.
A few staff at University of Canberra (UC) have written an IP policy proposal which clearly gives staff ownership of their work, and requires CC licensing if their staff use organisational infrastructure to create their work.
http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/University_of_Canberra/Proposed_policy_on_int...
Otago Polytechnic adopted an IP policy like that in 2007.
http://wikieducator.org/Otago_Polytechnic/Intellectual_property
Are there other examples, within or outside academia, where the organisation empowers its staff by providing a policy which clarifies when "work for hire" principle is enforced in this murky world of online collaboration?
Does the WMF have an intellectual property policy for works created by WMF employees? Employees edit and upload using free licenses under their own name, but does the copyright belong to the employee or to the WMF?
Roan provide some info re this at
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2012-January/057377.html
It would be nice if these elements of the WMF contract was placed on meta.
-- John Vandenberg
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org