Second image from Eric Faden’s “A Fairy(y) Use Tale” at Media Education Foundation <http://www.mediaed.org/>
I had started today's post meaning to suggest in a rational, ethical and legally-defensible way how educators should change their approach to both the use of and teaching about intellectual property. Instead, I've gotten caught up thinking about all the paradoxes and contradictions that the last couple of posts have forced me to consider. And regular readers all know how thinking makes my head hurt. Ouch!
Few subjects about which I blog tend to draw more praise, criticism and questions than the topics of intellectual property, copyright, and digital rights management. When a single post draws criticism from both Peter Rock who insists there is no such thing as "intellectual property" and Barbara Braxton who asks "even if the rules/laws don't make sense, or we don't agree with them, does that mean we still have the right to break them when it suits us?", I must be doing something right! Or terribly, terribly wrong.
These are areas where I feel less and less certainty that as a professional I have a firm understanding - or a defensible philosophy. Increasingly, I feel beset by paradoxes of intellectual property:
- While intellectual property, especially in digital formats, becomes an increasingly important "wealth generator" throughout the world, the laws surrounding it are becoming less understandable, more complex, and less relevant, especially to this generation of re-mixers and content-sharers.
- While today’s students want to use others' digital works, often without regard to the legal protections they may carry, many of these students’ own creative efforts will be the source of their incomes and they will need a means of protecting their own work and want others to respect intellectual property laws.
- While protection of individual property rights is given legal precedence, many argue there is a moral precedent and there may be economic value to placing all intellectual works into the public domain as soon as possible.
- Prohibitions are ubiquitous on media, but the warnings disregard fair use and may not be legal. Case law related to the use of digital media is scarce. Technology changes faster than the legal system can keep up.
- While librarians are considered the copyright experts in their buildings, they too often become the copyright “cops” instead. The experts on whom practicing librarians reply give "safe" advice that tends to honor the rights of intellectual property owners, not consumers.
- Thoughtful teachers and librarians be intellectual property use role models by being:
- followers of the letter of the law who err on the side of the information producer
- or questioners of the legality and ethical value of current law and practices who err of the side of the information consumer
- While intellectual property shares many qualities of physical property, it also has unique properties that many of us still struggle to understand. A physical apple and copyright protected song from Apple both may sell for $.99. Your assignment: Compare and contrast the "unauthorized acquisition" in financial, moral, and practical terms.
The teaching of copyright and other intellectual property issues is overdue for an overhaul in our schools. The mindset that “if we don’t know for sure, don’t do it” does not fit the needs of either students or their teachers. Changes I am thinking about recommending include:
- Changing the focus of copyright instruction from what is forbidden to what is permitted. (Sneak preview, see Pamela Burke's post here and read “The Cost of Copyright Confusion for Media Literacy.”
- When there is doubt, err on the side of the user. (Are we being "hyper-compliant"?)
- Ask the higher ethical questions when the law seems to make little sense. (Look where it got Socrates. Well, yeah, there was that hemlock bit...)
- Teach copyright from the point of view of the producer, as well as the consumer. (Does having others using your work without authorization or remuneration change your perception of intellectual property issues?)
Confused at a higher level? Then my work here is done.
Monday, April 7, 2008 at 06:17PM 
