Canadian University Students Taught To Protect IP

innocent_white_lamb writes "Graduate students at Carleton University (Ottawa) are taking steps to protect their intellectual property, at the same time are insuring that they are being properly recognized for their work. This is in response to the increased commercialization of research done at universities, and high-profile cases of copyright infringement by professors at the University of Toronto and Indiana University. 'The initiative will include workshops and a handbook outlining what would constitute an infraction of students' intellectual property rights, Howlett said. Examples include a student not receiving authorship on written work, or having a professor take credit for their work. "This isn't an indictment of profs at all," said Howlett. "It's just to ensure that students' rights are protected in the case that it does happen."'"

Comments

This is ridiculous

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh for the days when universities were places for learning and not little more than businesses and when the students were more focussed on learning than making a quick buck or some recognition.

Re:This is ridiculous

[dlevitan]

It's even worse in most American universities. While Canadian graduate students are being taught to protect their IP, graduate students at most American universities have to sign a waiver of their rights to anything they discover just to be able to go to graduate school. So, if you are a graduate student in an American university, then yes you certainly should sit on something truly inventive that you discover until after you graduate. Also, make sure you get rid of anything traceable to University equipment and recreate it after you leave. I don't see the problem with this. I'm starting grad school this Fall, and I'm getting paid to do research. Why should I be allowed to keep anything I discover if I'm being paid to do the research by someone else? I don't know what you've had to sign, but my waiver basically said the following things:

1. Since you're a student, if you're not being paid to do research and don't use university equipment, you keep whatever you discover.
2. If you are being paid, you're treated like an employee. Employees must sign all patents to the University. The University then decides if it wants to market the patent. If the patent is successfully licensed to someone and a profit is made, the profit is split between the inventor and the university (either 50-50 or 25-75 depending on the circumstances). Otherwise, the patent is returned to you.

I actually like this idea. I want to do research. If I discover something along the way, I don't have to deal with any bureaucracy and still get a nice bonus if my invention is successful.

not IP

[Mr. Slippery]

Examples include a student not receiving authorship on written work, or having a professor take credit for their work.

These are not "intellectual property" rights, they are "moral rights" of authors.

The distinction is important because one can be opposed to copyright as an artifical right created by the state but still be in favor of natural moral rights.

I don't think it's just to use force to prevent you from making a copy of one of my poems; but represent yourself as its author and I'll kick your ass.

Re:Ethics

[Locklin]

This is very different from copyright enforcement. This is about attribution. Huge difference.

Most graduate students would be more than happy to have thousands of people read their thesis. The problem arises when they don't get credited, or someone else claims ownership.

This is very different from students wanting $20 from you to read their paper.