Slashdot Mirror
A Teacher Asking Students To Destroy Notes?
zwei2stein writes "I found this question with far-reaching implications in the off-topic section of a forum I frequent: 'My economics teacher is forcing us to give up all of our work for the semester. Every page of notes and paper must be turned over to her to be destroyed to prevent future students from copying it. My binder was in my backpack, and she went into my backpack to take it. Is that legal?' Besides the issue with private property invasion, which was the trigger of that post, there is much more important question: Can a teacher ask a student not to retain knowledge? How does IP law relate to teaching and sharing knowledge? Whose property are those notes?"
If the copy was lawfully made (i.e. with permission of the Copyright holder) then it belongs to the person who owns the piece of paper. The Copyright holder can't demand that they return it, destroy it, not sell it, etc... It's called the "Doctrine of First Sale." You don't need a license to "use" your own legit copy of anything, with some exceptions for creation of derivate works, public performance to people not in the presence of the physical copy, rental of software, and a few others.
The teacher can only achieve the desired outcome by entering into an agreement (i.e. a Contract) with the students beforehand that all copies of the notes will be turned at the end of the semester. In other words, there's nothing in Copyright law that gives the Teacher the right demand the students return their notes, even if they copied them from the teacher with his permission.
Works of authorship become protected by Copyright as soon as they are fixed in a tangible medium of expression. A Copyright notice is not necessary anymore. However, it is a good idea since it establishes authorship and date of authorship, and reduces the possibility that someone might innocently believe the work is not protected.
P.S. Found a reference - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Martinez-Fuerte
"We have held that checkpoint searches are constitutional only if justified by consent or probable cause to search....And our holding today is limited to the type of stops described in this opinion. -[A]ny further detention...must be based on consent or probable cause." i.e. Without probable cause, like noises coming from the trunk, the homeland security checkpoints that are randomly placed in certain states may NOT search your car.
Here's a useful resource:
https://www.checkpointusa.org/blog/
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall