A conversation with Courtney L. Werner, author of “How Rhetoric and Composition Described and Defined New Media at the Start of the Twenty-First Century” (20:26)
Courtney L. Werner is an assistant professor of English at Monmouth University. She teaches courses on composition, digital composition, and linguistics. Her work has appeared in various collections as well as Computers and Composition and CEA Forum, and she is currently studying digital rhetoric in the writing center.
A conversation with Jessica Pauszek, author of “’Biscit’ Politics: Building Working-Class Educational Spaces from the Ground Up” (11:38).
Jessica Pauszek is an assistant professor of English and the Director of Writing at Texas A&M University-Commerce. Her work appears in Literacy in Composition Studies and Reflections. She is managing editor for New City Community Press and a coeditor of the Working and Writing for Change series with Parlor Press.
A conversation with Sarah Klotz, author of “Impossible Rhetorics of Survivance at the Carlisle School, 1879–1883.” (10:37)
Sarah Klotz is currently research assistant professor at the Center for Urban Education at USC’s Rossier School of Education. Prior to her current position, she was an English professor at Butte Community College in Northern California, where she taught first-year composition, basic writing, and Native American literature courses. Her research focuses on the intersections of race and literacy education in the United States. She is currently completing a monograph titled Decolonizing Developmental Writing: A Rhetorical History of the Carlisle Indian Industrial School, which has been awarded funding through an Emergent Research/er Grant from the Conference on College Composition and Communication.
Louisville, Kentucky
In March, the Intellectual Property Caucus met in Louisville, KY at the annual Conference on College Composition and Communication. Open to all registrants at the CCCC, the yearly meeting of the caucus provides an opportunity for participants to learn about intellectual property (IP)-related developments during the previous twelve months as well as to join in roundtable discussions about continuing or pending IP issues likely to affect instructors and students.
Summary of Roundtable Discussions
Among the roundtables this year was one at which participants discussed the uploading to instructor-rating sites of materials generated by college instructors (e.g., study guides and exams) and the impact of such uploading on the instructors’ intellectual property rights. This table also discussed the issues that may arise when K-12 teachers sell lesson plans. Do such materials fall into the category of work for hire, which may imply that these lesson plans are not theirs to sell? The question suggests the importance of intellectual property agreements even on the K-12 level.
Another roundtable discussed corporate pressure on YouTube that may lead to unwarranted restrictions on the fair use of copyrighted materials by educators and students. For example, the automated application of Content ID technology can prevent students from posting montages and can result in the unexpected disappearance of materials that instructors were planning to make use of in their classes. As it happened, only days before the caucus the organizers of this roundtable were presented with a perfect example of the misuse of Content ID when a lecture by Lawrence Lessig, noted authority on intellectual property issues, was pulled by YouTube.
Among the issues addressed by other roundtables: the relationship between fair use and our students’ growing exploitation of visual rhetoric; the impact of open access archives on higher education; and the need for educators to advocate for and implement open source software solutions. Participants debated the circumstances under which educators should encourage students to participate in the Creative Commons enterprise. They wondered what students could be encouraged to publish without either students or instructors running afoul of copyright restrictions. They discussed the need for educators to provide unrestricted access to data through the creation of open access archives where both scholarship and student work could be deposited. Participants at roundtables also brainstormed a number of specific IP resources that could be created for educators and students, such as an open source ‘starter kit’ with links to open source software as well as to instructions and tutorials for such software.
An Action Item from this Year’s Caucus
One specific step that participants were able to take at the caucus itself was the drafting of a letter in answer to a request in the Federal Register for public comments on the issue of strengthening U.S. enforcement of IP rights. This call for public comments was in response to a requirement in the Prioritizing Resources and Organization for Intellectual Property Act of 2008 that the federal government develop a strategy for protecting IP rights. Caucus participants were concerned that the call for comments in the Federal Register focused exclusively on the interests of copyright holders even though the wording of the U.S. Constitution implies that sometimes such interests must yield in favor of the promotion of learning. Participants therefore expressed their hope that the office charged with developing an IP strategy would be mindful of the ways in which the enforcement of copyright may adversely affect the educational community. In support of its request that this concern be taken into account, the letter pointed to situations in which “over-zealous and improper enforcement” have interfered with — or even prevented legitimate use of copyrighted material for educational purposes. Before this appeal was sent on to the United States Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator, it was submitted to the Committee on Intellectual Property of the CCCC, which joined the Intellectual Property Caucus in endorsing it. The larger CCCC organization supported the letter as well as did almost 100 other individuals and organizations who attached their signatures to the letter.
Members of the caucus will continue to follow the process by which the federal government develops its intellectual property enforcement strategy in hopes of keeping the needs of students and educators in the forefront.
Next Year’s CCCC-IP Caucus – Atlanta, Georgia 2011
Caucus members are also in the process of preparing proposals for roundtables for the 2011 caucus, which will take place at next year’s CCCC in Atlanta, GA. Coordinator of the proposals is the new senior chair of the caucus, Traci Zimmerman, an associate professor in the School of Writing, Rhetoric, and Technical Communication at James Madison University, where she teaches courses in authorship, literacy, and rhetorical theory. In addition to chairing the caucus, Traci serves on the Editorial Board for the NCTE IP Committee/Caucus Inbox Project. Anyone with questions about the caucus and its plans for its annual meeting in 2011 can contact Traci at zimmerta@jmu.edu.
Kim D. Gainer
Associate Professor
Department of English
Radford University
Radford, VA
kgainer@radford.edu
Wednesday, March 19, 2014, 2:00-5:30 p.m. in Grand Ballroom IV, JW Marriott Indianapolis
We warmly invite all CCCC conference attendees to the annual open meeting of the Caucus on Intellectual Property and Composition/Communication Studies (CCCC-IP). During this meeting, we welcome scholars with questions and concerns about intellectual property to join us in discussions of how intellectual property affects the work of scholars, teachers, and students in our field.
The IP Caucus is the public and open counterpart to the work of the CCCC Committee on Intellectual Property. Since its founding in 1994, the caucus has explored IP issues pertinent to our academic field and beyond, including the following:
This year’s interactive, action-focused meeting includes a breakout session into four roundtable groups. Each roundtable group, led by a facilitator, will discuss a particular set of IP issues in order to elicit practical solutions, action plans, lobbying strategies, and the production of documents for political, professional, and pedagogical use within the CCCs and beyond. Near the end of the meeting, the roundtables reconvene to share their discussions, plans, and recommendations for future action.
This year’s Caucus will feature four roundtables:
1. Legal and Legislative Developments
A roundtable focused on finding ways to safeguard the ability of students and teachers to make appropriate use of copyrighted material in furtherance of legitimate educational goals. In previous years, this roundtable included discussion of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), the Protect Intellectual Property Act (PIPA), and court cases relevant to the educational community (such as the lawsuit involving Georgia State University’s use of electronic reserve materials for educational purposes).
2. Sharing IP Stories: Teaching IP, Copyright/Copyleft, and Openness
A place for participants to share stories, resources, and successful pedagogies for teaching the complex and overlapping issues of intellectual property, plagiarism, and copyright in composition classes. Participants will also be invited to join in planning ways to distribute these pedagogies, as voices that can counteract the rhetoric of fear and criminality pervading discourse on IP.
3. Advocating for Open Access in Composition Studies
A roundtable focused on identifying strategies that teachers and scholars might use to foster greater use of and acceptance of Open Access practices—especially given the academic/economic climate of rising subscription fees for scholarly journals and initiatives for the privatization of public knowledge. In previous years, this roundtable discussed issues such as funding concerns associated with scholarly publication (including attention to OA-aligned imprints such as CCDP and Parlor Press that publish composition scholarship), the impacts of and frequencies of citation of articles in our field, and possible lobbying strategies for OA practices.
4. Evolving IP Policies for Journals
This roundtable updates participants on the latest publisher policies and their potential impact on Writing Studies. Since science-oriented journals tend to influence the academic publishing community as a whole, this year’s roundtable will focus on the following issues: 1) new IP policies from publishers of scientific journals in relation to the rise of distributed, open-access venues for displaying data; dealing with greater numbers of authors; a perceived rise in scientific fraud cases; and new templates for article formats and 2) some journal publishers’ policy of requiring copyright permissions to be secured for article epigraphs, which treats these epigraphs as different from quotations analyzed within the body an academic article.
For more information about the IP Caucus, we invite you to visit the IP Reports section of the CCCC web site. We also invite you to meet members of IP Caucus through Tim Amidon’s (Spring 2013) digital piece “Spotlight on Intellectual Property: An Interview with Members of the CCCC IP Caucus” in issue 17.2 of Kairos: A Journal of Rhetoric, Technology, and Pedagogy.
For more information about the CCCC IP meeting, contact this year’s meeting organizer and senior chair of the IP Caucus: Dr. Kyle Stedman, assistant professor of English at Rockford College, at kstedman@rockford.edu or on Twitter @kstedman. You can also contact the IP Caucus’ junior chair, Tim Amidon, PhD candidate at University of Rhode Island, at timothy_amidon@mail.uri.edu or on Twitter @timothyamidon.
As is always the case, on the last day of this year’s annual Conference on College Composition and Communication a business meeting was held at which various motions are voted upon. The Intellectual Property Committee, with input from the Intellectual Property Caucus, has been discussing the issue of plagiarism detection services (PDSs) and this year introduced a motion on the subject. This motion addressed several concerns about PDSs, including questions about whether such services threaten the rights of students to their own intellectual property. This concern arises from the fact that such services typically create databases out of papers submitted by students. A student, by uploading a paper to a PDS, may be ceding control over his or her intellectual property, which is then used for the financial benefit of a for-profit entity.
The issue of the intellectual property rights of students was not, however, the only one addressed by the motion. The Intellectual Property Committee and the Caucus was also concerned about the effects such services have on students’ sense of agency, on the learning environment, and on the role of the educator in addressing students’ use of sources. The motion not only articulated those concerns but also advocated educators “intervene and combat the potential negative influences” of PDSs, either by seeking alternatives to such services or, if utilizing them, by doing so according to best practices.
After discussion, the motion was passed as introduced. The full text of the motion is below.
WHEREAS CCCC does not endorse the use of plagiarism detection services;
WHEREAS plagiarism detection services can compromise academic integrity by potentially undermining students’ agency as writers, treating all students as always already plagiarists, creating a hostile learning environment, shifting the responsibility of identifying and interpreting source misuse from teachers to technology, and compelling students to agree to licensing agreements that threaten their privacy and rights to their own intellectual property;
WHEREAS plagiarism detection services potentially negatively change the role of the writing teacher; construct ill-conceived notions of originality and writing; disavow the complexities of writing in and with networked, digital technologies; and treat students as non-writers;
WHEREAS composition teacher-scholars can intervene and combat the potential negative influences of PDSs by educating colleagues about the realities of plagiarism and the troubling outcomes of using PDSs; advocating actively against the adoption of such services; modeling and sharing ideas for productive writing pedagogy; and conducting research into alternative pedagogical strategies to address plagiarism, including honor codes and process pedagogy;
BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that the Conference on College Composition and Communication commends institutions that offer sound pedagogical alternatives to PDS; encourages institutions that use PDS to implement practices in the best interests of their students, including notifying students at the beginning of the term that the service will be used, providing students with a non-coercive and convenient opt out process, and inviting students to submit drafts to the service before turning in final text.
For related articles on the issue of Plagiarism Detection Services, see these earlier IP Reports: Michael J. Klein’s “IP Caucus Roundtable: Students’ Rights to Their Writing and to the Writing of Others” and Kim Gainer’s “Plagiarism Detection Services: Unsettled Questions.” See also Traci A. Zimmerman’s “McClean Students File Suit against Turnitin.com: Useful Tool or Instrument of Tyranny?” in Top Intellectual Property Developments of 2007 for Scholars of Composition, Rhetoric, and Communication and Wendy Warren Austin’s “Virginia High School Students Rebel against Mandatory Use of Turnitin.com” in Major Intellectual Property Developments of 2006 for Scholars of Composition, Rhetoric, and Communication.
If you are planning to visit the annual Convention of the Conference on College Composition and Communication in Las Vegas this March, please consider attending the Wednesday afternoon meeting on Intellectual Property in Composition Studies. This session, sponsored by the Caucus on Intellectual Property and Composition/Communication Studies (CCCC-IP), explores issues of copyright, fair use, openness, remix, access, and the ownership and use of intellectual property (IP). The Caucus is the public and open counterpart to the work of the CCCC Committee on Intellectual Property, and since 1994 has sponsored explorations of IP issues pertinent to teachers, scholars, and students. All are welcome to the practical and action-focused meetings, where participants work in roundtables to discuss topics such as plagiarism and authorship, student and teacher IP rights, open access and open source policies, and best practices in teaching students and instructors about IP. Roundtable leaders provide overviews of their topics, and participants then create action plans, develop lobbying strategies, and produce documents for political, professional, and pedagogical use. At the end of the workshop, participants reconvene to share their plans and recommendations for future action.
This year’s Caucus will feature four roundtables. The first, on Legal and Legislative Developments, will host a discussion of the year’s legal and legislative IP developments as they affect students and educators. In previous years our colleagues at this table have discussed the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), which under some circumstances can have an adverse impact on what students and faculty are able to accomplish in the classroom. Other subjects of discussion have included the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Protect Intellectual Property Act (PIPA), each proposed in 2011 and withdrawn in 2012 in the face of intense criticism. Discussions have also touched on court cases being closely watched by the educational community, such as one involving Georgia State University’s system of electronic reserves. No matter what the specific topics, discussion will revolve around finding ways to safeguard the ability of students and teachers to make appropriate use of copyrighted material in
furtherance of legitimate educational goals.
Participants at the second roundtable, Sharing IP Stories: Teaching IP, Copyright/left, and Openness, will be invited to share their stories, resources, and successful pedagogies for teaching the complex and overlapping issues of intellectual property, plagiarism, and copyright in composition classes. Participants will also be invited to join in planning ways to distribute these pedagogies, as voices that can counteract the rhetoric of fear and criminality pervading discourse on IP. Examples of sharing include IP stories uploaded to the DALN (Digital Archive of Literacy Narratives) to reach a large community, perhaps even beyond composition studies.
At the third roundtable, Advocating for Open Access in Composition Studies, participants will seek to identify strategies composition and rhetoric teachers and scholars might use to foster greater acceptance and use of Open Access practices within and beyond our discipline. Open Access (OA) practices are increasingly important in an economic climate of rising subscription fees for scholarly journals and initiatives for the privatization of public knowledge, as evidenced by Reed Elsevier’s sponsoring of the Research Works Act that sought to close off public access to taxpayer-funded scholarship. Discussion focuses on issues of Green and Gold OA, funding concerns associated with scholarly publication (including attention to OA-aligned imprints such as CCDP and Parlor Press that publish composition scholarship), citation impact, and aligning possible lobbying strategies with NCTE’s DC office.
Participants at the last roundtable will examine the Evolving IP Policies for Journals that are shaping scholarly journals and publication practices. Discussion will focuses on two cases. First, publishers of scientific journals have begun to establish new IP policies as they respond to greater numbers of authors; distributed, open-access venues for displaying data; a perceived rise in scientific fraud cases; and new templates for article formats. These developments are noteworthy as the policies of scientific journals tend to influence academic publishing as a whole. Second, some journal publishers are now requiring copyright permissions be secured for article epigraphs, treating them as different from quotations analyzed within the body of a text. This roundtable updates participants on the latest policies and their potential impact on Writing Studies.
The roundtables will take place on Wednesday, March 13, from 2-5:30 p.m., on the first floor of the Riviera Hotel, in Grande Ballroom C. This year’s meeting organizer and senior chair of the Caucus is Dr. Mike Edwards, assistant professor of English at Washington State University, who can be reached at mike.edwards@wsu.edu. He has been assisted by the junior chair, Dr. Kyle Stedman, assistant professor of English at Rockford College, who can be reached at kstedman@rockford.edu.
Martine Courant Rife
Senior Chair, CCCC-IP Caucus
Lansing Community College
martinerife@gmail.com
Mike Edwards
Junior Chair, CCCC-IP Caucus
United States Military Academy
preterite@gmail.com
If you are planning to attend the Conference on College Composition and Communication in Louisville, KY, please consider attending the meeting of the Caucus on Intellectual Property and Composition/Communication Studies (CCCC-IP) that will take place the afternoon of Wednesday, March 21st. Since 1994, the Caucus has sponsored explorations of intellectual property issues pertinent to teachers, scholars, and students. Meeting in simultaneous roundtables, participants discuss topics such as plagiarism and authorship, student and teacher IP rights, open access and open source policies, and best practices in teaching students and instructors about IP. Roundtable speakers will provide overviews of their topics, and participants will then create action plans, develop lobbying strategies, and produce documents for political, professional, and pedagogical use. At the end of the workshop, participants reconvene to share their plans and recommendations for future action.
This year, the Caucus will feature seven roundtables:
DMCA Exemption
The first roundtable will survey recent developments in the realm of Digital Millennium Copyright Act(DMCA) as they affect education, with an eye toward proposing actions that the caucus can take to ameliorate the impact of the act.Since its passage in 1998, the DMCA, which criminalizes the circumvention of Digital Rights Management and seeks to restrict the use of copyrighted material on the internet, has been invoked in ways that go beyond the legitimate protection of intellectual property rights. The default setting, as it were, is to bar all use, regardless of whether it is fair use. As documented by the Electronic Freedom Foundation, the DMCA has been used as a way of stifling critique and as a tool that companies can wield against competitors. Such outcomes may not have been intended by the framers of the DMCA, but their existence has implications for students and educators, whether on the K-12 or college level. The 2012 DMCA Exemption rulemaking proceedings are now underway, and roundtable participants will be updated on these proceedings.
Plagiarism
Participants in the second roundtable will consider how best to develop a student-centered plagiarism policy for the twenty-first century. Language currently used to describe plagiarism reflects the notion that students need to be policed by faculty lest students commit plagiarism, be caught and be found guilty of such an infraction. Many, if not all, plagiarism statements reify this antagonistic relationship between faculty and students, treating plagiarism as something students must avoid lest they be punished for the infraction. Rather than having the students inactively participate in this process, students could be empowered through the formulation of plagiarism statements creating bilateral dialogues rather than unilateral diatribes. Participants in this roundtable will be invited to review a draft of a student-centered plagiarism statement formulated by members of the IP caucus during the past year. The hope is that this type of statement can act as a means of engaging students in discussions on the effects of plagiarism rather than simply presenting them with a list of punishments for committing plagiarism.
IP and Metadata
Another roundtable will look at the implications of the participatory nature of the web, which raises questions about the ownership of “metadata” and user-generated content. From Facebook profiles to Google Analytics to Google searches to cellphone geolocation to RFIDs in identification cards for consumer goods, user-generated content and data are an important part of the participatory web. Value is co-created by and for a community of users who contribute content and generate data through their online interactions. However, often these contributions are made without clear understandings among users about their ownership and privacy rights. These texts and meta-texts say a lot about who users are, what they do, where they do it, how, and perhaps even why. But who has access and control of these texts and who can claim ownership to the information that users author about themselves? This roundtable will invite participants to consider who claims and/or should claim ownership and authorship of user-generated content and metadata. Participantsalso will discuss related concerns over users’ rights to safe and ethical composing in contemporary digital spaces. One goal of the roundtable will be to identify the relevant issues for intellectual property scholars in rhetoric and composition that should be further explored and researched.
Fair Use
Participants in the fourth roundtable will have an opportunity to consider the implications of several significant “fair use” cases, including that of Georgia State. For the past three years, Cambridge and Oxford University Presses and Sage Publishing have been pursuing Georgia State University representatives in court over online reserves and courseware systems that make available to students articles and book chapters without paying for permissions. In September of 2010, Judge Orinda Evans narrowed the scope of litigation by limiting trial to contributory infringement. The outcome of this case will likely set the standards for these distribution systems, just as Basic Books, Inc. v. Kinko’s Graphics Corporation and Princeton University Press V. Michigan Document Services, Inc. did for course packs. The speaker at this roundtable will update participants on the outcomes of this case and the implications for universities and university libraries. He will also identify other pending fair use cases that may impact faculty and student work in higher education.
Copyright and Pedagogy
The fifth roundtable will provide educators with the opportunity to both contribute and learn about approaches to teaching about ownership, fair use, and related issues. In particular, teachers will be invited to share their stories, resources, and ideas about successful pedagogies for teaching the complex and overlapping issues of intellectual property, plagiarism, and copyright in composition classes. Participants in the roundtable also will be invited to considerhow these pedagogies may be distributed to others and how their voices may be able to counteract the rhetoric of fear and criminality pervading discourse on IP.
Copyright and Scholarly Publishing
Participants in the sixth roundtable will examine evolving IP policies for journals, with a particular emphasis on the precedents being set in scientific publishing. Recently, two trends have led publishers of scientific journals to establish new IP policies. First, a number of scientific fraud and questionable authorship cases have led to revised definitions of scientific authorship and the use of professional plagiarism detection services. Second, government mandates across the globe have demanded open access to both published articles and relevant data. Because the policies of scientific journals tend to influence academic publishing as a whole, this roundtable will update participants on the latest policies and their potential impact on Writing Studies.
Authors’ Rights and Responsibility
The last roundtable will look at intellectual property issues in the context of creative writing and will ask what “publishing” means to the authors of such literature. One of the promising developments for creative writers has been the increased status given to online literary journals. With print journals becoming increasingly limited, online literature can be where the truly cutting edge fiction, poetry, and creative nonfiction happens. However, how do traditional journals and their standard First North American Rights view web spaces? An online literary journal seems clearly to be a prior publication, but what about blogs? What about comment drafting as in the April PAD (Poem a Day) competition on Poetic Asides? The result for some of the major print players, most notably Poetry, is to consider any web presence as prior publication, thus eliminating the work from consideration. The goal for participants at this table is to speculate about reasonable solutions to the discontinuity between print/web standards and generate strategies for writers who use blogs for prewriting, drafting, or metadiscourse.
We hope to see everyone in St. Louis! For questions or further information, please contact this year’s caucus chair, Martine Courant Rife, martinerife@gmail.com.
This column is sponsored by the Intellectual Property Committee of the CCCC and the CCCC-Intellectual Property Caucus. The IP Caucus maintains a mailing list. If you would like to receive notices of programs sponsored by the Caucus or of opportunities to submit articles to either this column or to an annual report on intellectual property issues, please contact kgainer@radford.edu.
This is the ninth volume of the CCCC Intellectual Property Annual, my seventh as editor. I’ve been reflecting lately about the type of authorship we engage in as we create the CCCC Intellectual Property Annual each year. This publication is not quite like a typical edited collection or issue of a journal. Ever since John Logie started the Annual, the calls for submissions included specific suggested topics – events that took place over the previous year in copyright and intellectual property news. I followed suit when I took over; I suggested a few topics, but when those were claimed, there were other people who also wanted to write for the Annual. I encouraged them to write about any topic they found interesting, but they preferred that I provide a list of additional topics.
So that’s been my invention process: I collect news over the course of the year, and toward the end of each calendar year, I sift through the archives of the Creative Commons blog and the Electronic Frontier Foundation blog, and I generate a list of events for contributors to write about. I post this list, first to the IP Caucus list, and then to the other rhetoric and composition listservs, while still inviting people to write about other events. People claim the subjects they want to write about, and before too long, the new CCCC-IP Annual is published. What I do could be called distributed authorship, macro-authorship, cooperative authorship, or delegated authorship. I’m thinking of doing something similar in my first-year writing classes, but on a subject selected by the students.
The 2013 Annual features a report from Mike Edwards about Elsevier’s ordering scholars to take down the copies of their journal articles that they’d posted to academia.edu and the counter-movement among some professors who pledge not to review for or submit articles to journals published by Elsevier. Laurie Cubbison explores the debate about whether or not Arthur Conan Doyle’s work can be legally considered as an oeuvre for copyright purposes — some stories are in the public domain, but the last one in the series is still under copyright, so are the characters protected?
Chris Gerben gives us an overview of the Copyright Alert System — ISPs detect possible copyright infringement and send “warnings” to users, with the possible slowing down of their internet speed. Copyright activists, Gerben claims, overreacted to the CAS when it was formed, and calls for a more measured rhetorical response when encountering such content industry strategies. Timothy Amidon reports the problems in the formation of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which seems to be in a star chamber. It stands to extend all the nations’ copyright terms to those of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, and the architectural regulation of software will inhibit free exchange of ideas.
One of the more memorable copyright skirmishes from 2013 was toy company GoldieBlox’s use of the song “Girls” by the Beastie Boys in their online commercial. Kyle Stedman gives us a very lucid parsing of the various factors in play in this case. Traci Zimmerman reviews The Future of Creative Commons: Realizing the Value of Sharing in a Digital World, which reflects on Creative Commons’ accomplishments over the last decade and gives an idea of what their future plans are, including translating their documents into multiple languages and making their licenses truly global in reach. Finally, Kim Gainer walks us through the fair use test as applied by the court to Google’s digitization of books.
I will close by saying that we are now well into 2014, and I am gearing up for the next issue of the CCCC Intellectual Property Annual. I don’t want to give any spoilers, but I will say that I want to be a bit less conventional regarding genre in the future. When John Logie first started the Annual, he described the articles he was looking for as “a step up from a blog post.” Certainly we will still have several of those. However, I would like to branch out into listicles (“Ten Things Rhetoric and Composition Teachers Need to Know about _____”), short tweet-style annotated bibliographies, and image macros or someecards with brief accompanying analyses. Taking the humor about authorship seriously can yield some insights that we can share with each other and with students. Here are some examples, the last, and cleverest, one by Collin Brooke.
Copyright © 1998 - 2024 National Council of Teachers of English. All rights reserved in all media.
1111 W. Kenyon Road, Urbana, Illinois 61801-1096 Phone: 217-328-3870 or 877-369-6283
Looking for information? Browse our FAQs, tour our sitemap and store sitemap, or contact NCTE
Read our Privacy Policy Statement and Links Policy. Use of this site signifies your agreement to the Terms of Use
