Slashdot Mirror


School Board Considers Copyright Ownership of Student and Teacher Works

schwit1 writes "A proposal by the Prince George's County Board of Education to copyright work created by staff and students for school could mean that a picture drawn by a first-grader, a lesson plan developed by a teacher or an app created by a teen would belong to the school system, not the individual. It's not unusual for a company to hold the rights to an employee's work, copyright policy experts said. But the Prince George's policy goes a step further by saying that work created for the school by employees during their own time and using their own materials is the school system's property."

351 comments

  1. Best quote of the article by sabri · · Score: 0

    âoeItâ(TM)s like they are exploiting the kids,â he said.

    And that's the best quote of the article...

    --
    I'm not a complete idiot... Some parts are missing.
    1. Re:Best quote of the article by chronokitsune3233 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I love the encoding issues I find on this site. Instead of \xE2\x80\x9C for UTF-8, you get \xE2\x6F\x65 for the left double quotation mark (U+201C), which can't be decoded as UTF-8 because it's not proper UTF-8 due to the values of the second and third bytes. How does that even happen? \x6F\x65 and \x80\x9C aren't even remotely related-looking in binary form, and converting to another encoding doesn't work either. WTF? Or maybe it's Windows' fault. Yeah. That's it. It's not Slashdot's fault. It's Windows' fault. Stupid Windows.

      --
      I have been a captive in America my entire life. Everybody and everything uses customary units instead of metric.
    2. Re:Best quote of the article by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 0

      I get encoding issues like that so much that I've basically resigned to living with them and switch between UTF-8 and Western depending on which is the least difficult to read.

      --
      A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
    3. Re:Best quote of the article by sabri · · Score: 0

      I love the encoding issues I find on this site

      Which is interesting, because in the preview, everything looked ok...

      --
      I'm not a complete idiot... Some parts are missing.
    4. Re:Best quote of the article by DKlineburg · · Score: 0

      Is this why I can't ever read the quote symbol? It is all garbled?

      --
      Memory is deceptive because it is colored by today's events. - Albert Einstein
    5. Re:Best quote of the article by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      "I love the encoding issues I find on this site."

      HTML escape characters used to work, but that stopped working quite a while ago. Most of them, anyway.

      I'm not sure what they did. I believe most of the site is coded in Perl. But BuiltWith says the site encoding is in UTF-8. So, there must be some kind of munging going on in the back-end.

    6. Re:Best quote of the article by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      "Is this why I can't ever read the quote symbol? It is all garbled?"

      That happens most often when people use copy-and-paste, because they are pasting in begin- and end-quotes, instead of the common universal double quotes: ".

      Something about their encoding is weird. There is no doubt about that.

    7. Re:Best quote of the article by DKlineburg · · Score: 1

      It is funny you mention that. I was doing some scripting, and didn't think about copy and paste of code that was in the KB for what I was doing. Whoever wrote the KB, put one of those quotes in there. The code read correctly, until I finally spotted that the quotes were slightly curved. Needless to say the code borked repeatable before I finally caught it. I made notes that there was this issue so future people didn't make the same mistake. Guess my fault for copy and paste, but it was the same code over and over for this one solution.

      --
      Memory is deceptive because it is colored by today's events. - Albert Einstein
    8. Re:Best quote of the article by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      I ran into this awhile back on some ebooks I was trying to read. I got a crash course in sed and awk because nothing else could parse large files quickly and replace things.

    9. Re:Best quote of the article by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      (Modern versions of) Perl can work with UTF- 8 just fine, too. That makes it even more of a shame.

  2. Kid's artwork? by sunderland56 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Most tech companies claim ownership of anything created by employees, whether created at work or on their own time.

    But, the students are not employees, and signed no waiver when they enrolled. Claiming ownership of the student's creations is rediculous.

    1. Re:Kid's artwork? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      If it is a public school there is no way they can possibly claim ownership. The government requires attendance.

    2. Re:Kid's artwork? by XaXXon · · Score: 1

      The government doesn't require attendance of public schools. It requires schooling.

    3. Re:Kid's artwork? by epyT-R · · Score: 1

      and employees aren't slaves.. their out-of-the-office creations should not be owned by employers either. This should be a default, intrinsic right, and not something employees have to battle for. What's far more amazing to me than attempts by schools to do the same to students, is how willing we are to accept this insult in adult affairs while still getting upset when it's applied to children. So it's only ok for children to own the produce of their labor now?

    4. Re:Kid's artwork? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      But, the students are not employees, and signed no waiver when they enrolled. Claiming ownership of the student's creations is rediculous.

      So is spelling common words incorrectly. It's 2013 - how are you accessing the internet without having a built-in spell check?

      Speel check in't automatically installed - even with Firefox on all patlforms.

      He could be using some really litewate internet broweser - like the one in Slitaz which ahs no spielchick for it.

      As for me, I have better things to do than make sure my internet posts are perfect. As it is, this is a complete waste of time and arguing twith the Internet peanut gallery is just ludicrous.

      If I really had a life, I wouldn't even have wasted my time with this pathetic post answering some pedant with no life on Slashdot.

    5. Re:Kid's artwork? by hedwards · · Score: 1

      I think those are usually salaried employees and the reason for it is that it makes it a lot less complicated when there's a dispute over ownership. So, that people don't have to constantly log when they had various ideas and what led to the idea.

      But, those folks are usually paid much better than teachers are and generally have funds to do their jobs in a way that teachers don't usually get funding.

    6. Re:Kid's artwork? by hawguy · · Score: 4, Informative

      Most tech companies claim ownership of anything created by employees, whether created at work or on their own time.

      But, the students are not employees, and signed no waiver when they enrolled. Claiming ownership of the student's creations is rediculous.

      That's not the case in California. Or rather, companies may still claim ownership of all inventions in their employment contract, but it's not enforceable. If the invention is done on the employee's own time and equipment and is not related to or derived from the employee's work at the company, the company has no right of ownership:

      http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=lab&group=02001-03000&file=2870-2872

    7. Re:Kid's artwork? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Except that even 'private tutoring' requires them to come into schools for their standardized testing (At least from the few people I know who did home schooling.)

      Hence that school could claim it even if the student never set foot inside the school outside the testing.

      The point is really that intellectual property is becoming too big a beast with FAR FAR too many unilateral arrangements being made.

      The college anti-cheating with 'perpetual royalty-free licensing rights to all submitted work' or you get an F in the class, for example. Sounds like coercion to me, and if I'm not getting a kickback for it, why should they get to make money off something that only works if they have freely submitted works from TUITION PAYING STUDENTS in the first place?

      Sorry, this is one of my pet peeves with the ever dwindling respect for the individuals right's especially here in America, but abroad as well (Not to say it's necessarily any worse here or abroad than in the less-than-recent past, only that it's getting worse than it was in the past few decades.

    8. Re:Kid's artwork? by N0Man74 · · Score: 1

      I think those are usually salaried employees and the reason for it is that it makes it a lot less complicated when there's a dispute over ownership. So, that people don't have to constantly log when they had various ideas and what led to the idea.

      But, those folks are usually paid much better than teachers are and generally have funds to do their jobs in a way that teachers don't usually get funding.

      Of course, it's the best thing for everyone. Why worry about those pesky nuances of when someone got an idea or created something, just assume the corporations own everything.

    9. Re:Kid's artwork? by sjames · · Score: 1

      Not only are they not employees, they are not free to resign until they turn 16 at least. The only reason it can't be considered slavery is that 'supposedly', the school is working for the parents to educate the child. The school claiming ownership of the child's work would, in fact, make it slavery.

    10. Re:Kid's artwork? by pwizard2 · · Score: 2

      I would hope most people would cross out any such clause in an employment contract before signing it (I would). Sorry, but some asshole executive doesn't get automatic rights to what I produce on my own time using my own resources. If they want to outright *buy* the project I might listen to what they have to say but no promises on whether I would be willing to take their offer. If I were working on a closed-source project on my own time with intent to sell it later and someone tried to steal it from me like that, I might just GPL the thing out of pure spite.

      --
      "It is a denial of justice not to stretch out a helping hand to the fallen; that is the common right of humanity."
    11. Re:Kid's artwork? by cigawoot · · Score: 0

      But, the students are not employees, and signed no waiver when they enrolled.

      I agree. A school should not be able to claim copyright on a student's work because they're not employed by the school. Teachers, on the other hand, are employed by the school, and thereby their work should be the property of the employer.

    12. Re:Kid's artwork? by Jessified · · Score: 2

      Yea particularly if you get to higher levels where the students are paying to be there.

      Following current copyright logic...the students should get the rights to work created by teachers...given that the students are paying their salaries.

    13. Re:Kid's artwork? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So they make them sign something at the begining of the year saying the school gets all copyrights. If you don't like it you can... home school or attend a private school. It wouldn't be the first time a public school has done it that way. Ours makes us sign that we agree they are not subject to public records requests despite the attorney general insisting they are and what I know of case law saying they are. They're hope is when challenged they can claim we signed away our rights. Of course the prinicipal is on record as saying he was told to follow district policy and is not bound by the law.

    14. Re:Kid's artwork? by Jessified · · Score: 2

      PS how can it be up to a school board to determine law?

    15. Re:Kid's artwork? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      But, the students are not employees, and signed no waiver when they enrolled. Claiming ownership of the student's creations is rediculous.

      So is spelling common words incorrectly. It's 2013 - how are you accessing the internet without having a built-in spell check?

      So is spelling common words incorrectly. It's 2013 - how are you accessing the internet without having a built-in spell checker?

      "Spell check" is an action, "spell checker" is a thing you can use, doesn't your browser have a built in grammar-checker.

    16. Re:Kid's artwork? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not only that, but it is really a spelling checker, unless you're actually checking spells before you cast them.

    17. Re:Kid's artwork? by Belial6 · · Score: 4, Informative

      As the parent of a home schooled child, I can tell you that children are not required to do standardized testing. They are not even required in public schools. Standardized testing is universal in public schools for the same reason that (with only a few exceptions) 65 MPH is the standard maximum speed limit on highways. The federal government takes money from your community, and if you want it back, you have to do what they say. While many public schools are luring some home school families into their roll books with offers of free money, and these students would be required to take standardized test by the schools; just as common is the home school families who establish their own private school, don't take any federal money, and thus don't need to take the standardized tests.

    18. Re:Kid's artwork? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't worry - it won't happen.
      They don't pay teachers enough that they would allow their works to be copyrighted by the schools - that school would find itself with no teachers and no students.

      Someone needs to kick those school board members in the head, through their asses.

    19. Re:Kid's artwork? by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      You would be wrong. It is pretty much boiler plate now for any job, no matter how little it pays or whether it is salary or hourly. It is an ugly situation caused by an extreme disparity in power. It will only get worse as automation increases.

    20. Re:Kid's artwork? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That would be true if it weren't wrong and not legally unenforceable

    21. Re:Kid's artwork? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is like saying if I push a kid off a bridge I didn't kill the kid. The ground is what killed the kid. Very few people are able to do what amounts to alternative schooling which you have described. This is being forced on students.

    22. Re:Kid's artwork? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not only that, but it is really a spelling checker, unless you're actually checking spells before you cast them.

      Touché....sir but then I don't claim to be a spelling/grammar nazis. It's fun to beat them with their own stick isn't it?

    23. Re:Kid's artwork? by flyneye · · Score: 2

      To compound your point, is this a public school? If so then it is taxpayer funded. What is the point of copyrighting by the B.O.E, something owned by the public.
      Perhaps the B.O.E. got a substandard public education and doesn't know any better. Maybe, someone should test their literacy or their urine.

      --
      *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
    24. Re:Kid's artwork? by JWW · · Score: 4, Funny

      I know with a spell checker your gauranteed to spell words correctly!

    25. Re:Kid's artwork? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      a teacher salary and work contract state their duties. any work outside those enumerated duties the school should have no right to. how is inventing something on your own different than delivering pizza as second job? or are you going to tell me the school district is entitled to a cut of that income also.

    26. Re:Kid's artwork? by turbidostato · · Score: 2

      "their out-of-the-office creations should not be owned by employers either. This should be a default, intrinsic right, and not something employees have to battle for."

      And so it is in more civilized countries.

    27. Re:Kid's artwork? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That would be right if it were true or remotely enforceable. Some tech companies do that but not most of them. Nice try

    28. Re:Kid's artwork? by himurabattousai · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Things like the double-nickel NMSL that was, thankfully, discarded in the mid nineties, the .08 BAC limit, or the legal drinking age of 21 years, all which were adopted nationwide as the result of coercion from the Feds, are the perfect car analogy for this situation. A majority of the states have highway speed limits of 70+. No federal highway dollars are currently tied to speed limits, just as no federal education dollars should be tied to dysfunctional standardized testing. In fact, the current model of taking away money due to poor testing performance practically guarantees that bad schools will remain bad. I'm not saying that money is the solution to every problem in our schools, but the proper application of sufficient funds can make a difference.

      --
      "osake no hou ga, biiru yori ii" to omotteiru.
    29. Re:Kid's artwork? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Crossing out the clause means nothing. You still need to get the company to also note and agree to the cross out. Good luck doing that. Unless you're a super high valued applicant where they contacted you to poach you from another company, it ain't gonna happen.

    30. Re:Kid's artwork? by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yeah, but it's a great way to stifle teacher creativity. Why should the teachers bother to create anything that might be beneficial to the school if it will just be taken from them?

    31. Re:Kid's artwork? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Spell check" is a colloquialism used as both a noun and a verb. You might not use the phrase in scholarly papers, but you'd be hard-pressed to find another environment where it isn't acceptable.

    32. Re:Kid's artwork? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The true irony is that you couldn't recognize irony if it walked up and punched you in the face.

      Nor can you recognize simple humour.

      cheers,

    33. Re:Kid's artwork? by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 3, Informative

      But, the students are not employees, and signed no waiver when they enrolled.

      I agree. A school should not be able to claim copyright on a student's work because they're not employed by the school. Teachers, on the other hand, are employed by the school, and thereby their work should be the property of the employer.

      No it shouldn't. Who made up THAT idea? The employer only owns the employee's work if the employer has a contractual arrangement with the employee assigning ownership of such work. (Accepting an assignment to work on a project is such an agreement.)

      Otherwise, anything you do on your own initiative is your own work and you own all rights to it. This is why tech companies typically make their employees sign agreements that explicitly assign their creative works to the employers. (Such agreements vary in how much of the employees work the employer has rights to, but they are usually pretty onerous.) They wouldn't bother getting you to sign something stating that what you do is theirs if they already knew that it was by default.

    34. Re:Kid's artwork? by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      tech companies TRY to get you to agree to employment contracts saying that anything you do is theirs.

      in calif, this is not enforceable, though (ianal). ie, if you use your own equip on your own time and its not a core comp of the company, they have no claims on what you do at home.

      just try (at least) to get your contract clear on this. cross out the lines, say 'declined' and initial. its at least something.

      finally, have a lawyer on your side review employment agreements. its not cheap but they WILL catch the BS that companies try, these days.

      plus, you can say 'your guy is advising you to have such and such changed'. ie, you are not the bad guy, your lawyer is. 'I wanted to sign it, but my guy said I shouldn't.'. make him the bad guy; and he won't care, its what his job is (your lawyer).

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    35. Re:Kid's artwork? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get off your bullshit high horse moron.

    36. Re:Kid's artwork? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where we carry light sabres.

    37. Re:Kid's artwork? by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      Claiming ownership of the student's creations is rediculous

      It is awful! It's not only diculous, it comes back around for more and is re-diculous.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    38. Re:Kid's artwork? by ScentCone · · Score: 1, Informative

      You're getting this wrong. Look up "work for hire." The default position is that work you do for your employer is theirs. Only a contract that specifically changes that would put the rights back in the hands of the employee who was getting paid a salary to do the work.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    39. Re:Kid's artwork? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it is a public school there is no way they can possibly claim ownership. The government requires attendance.

      Tell that to the guy who made your license plates.

    40. Re:Kid's artwork? by evil_aaronm · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Trust me - it's a power thing. I served on a BOE and saw it first-hand. Bunch of nobodys in Podunk, but they get elected to the board, and they think they can do whatever they like. Of course, the standard distribution curve applies, so you'll have some that take it to ridiculous extremes.

    41. Re:Kid's artwork? by TheLink · · Score: 1

      If it's in the contract you signed and one day that law changes so that the company can claim ownership, does it then become enforceable? Or it's all as per when you signed?

      To be safe you should strike off all stuff you don't want to be bound to.

      --
    42. Re:Kid's artwork? by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 1

      Except I've never seen an "employment contract" that didn't also claim that only corporate HQ had the authority to make any changes to the deal.

      --
      A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
    43. Re:Kid's artwork? by Deep+Esophagus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      While we were not required to do anything but announce our intention to homeschool and provide (without requiring approval) our curriculum for the year, we did give our homeschooled kids the Stanford Achievement Test each year. Not for any reporting requirements, but to see where we were failing as teachers.

      The result? Daughter got a full ride scholarship, and son got about half his tuition paid by scholarship. Of course neither one of them has any friends or knows how to have a conversation or play games because it never occurred to us to socialize them under any circumstances. I kid! They've both done much better socially than I ever did, even given the handicap of inheriting my F&SF/gaming/comics/Monty Python genes.

      Belial6, it's worth noting that standardized testing may not be required in YOUR state, but the laws vary wildly from state to state. Some places the rules are so strict you might as well not bother homeschooling for all the freedom you have to shape your child's academic plan; others (like Wyoming where we live) are extremely laissez-faire.

      I think I'm gonna go back through the last 18 years of school projects and LEGO models, and copyright them all in my name.

    44. Re:Kid's artwork? by sumdumass · · Score: 2

      If pushed, a waiver like that would likely never be enforceable under the doctrine of undue influence and duress. A challenge by a competent lawyer and it would be as if the wavier was never signed.

    45. Re:Kid's artwork? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      their out-of-the-office creations should not be owned by employers either

      Even in places where your employer cannot normally assert ownership of "IP" created outside of work hours (most of Europe, and also California, IIRC), they can still claim ownership if it's the sort of thing you're supposed to be doing as part of your job.

      Which basically makes sense. If you're paid to come up with ideas, you don't get to keep the best ones for yourself and let your employer have the mediocre ones. It's not as if you can prove (even weakly) when you had a particular idea.

      If the law ever changes, you can look forward to your office chair being built into an MRI scanner so that your employer has a record of what you thought of and when.

    46. Re:Kid's artwork? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No no it is not.

    47. Re:Kid's artwork? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not to mention ... most of the time parents provide the supplies.

    48. Re:Kid's artwork? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What misspelling? Clearly he was suggesting that it was so diculous that it was diculous all over again. It's a perfectly cromulent word!

    49. Re:Kid's artwork? by MacGyver2210 · · Score: 1

      Beyond the 'rights' people have to what they create during employment, why go and take more rights away from the most important, hardest working, and most poorly paid professions? Do you really want to discourage teachers from doing anything above and beyond basic lesson plans because they're worried the school will essentially rip them off at their own expense?

      Seems like the biggest thing stopping government education from functioning properly is the government.

      --
      If the only way you can accept an assertion is by faith, then you are conceding that it can't be taken on its own merits
    50. Re:Kid's artwork? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most tech companies claim ownership of anything created by employees, whether created at work or on their own time.

      But, the students are not employees, and signed no waiver when they enrolled. Claiming ownership of the student's creations is rediculous.

      I remember in 6th Grade, I was enrolled in a public school system (in the US). I arrived in my math class only to find an administrator alongside my teacher handing out forms at the door. It was a document that all students were supposed to sign that gave them permission to punish us for things that happened outside of what is normally the school's jurisdiction, as well as to clarify that we could not have freedom of expression in what we wear or say on school grounds.

      Being a smartass, I said "It is impossible to sign away your first amendment rights in a contract." and "You can't force us to sign this, because you have to let us come to school since it's funded by taxes."

      They gave me a detention and told the class that they would be given two-weeks' suspension from school if they didn't sign it.

      I'm still 99% sure none of that would hold up in a court, but no one will challenge it because it would seem like petty litigation.

      TLDR; was forced to sign a legal document in 6th grade in a US public school.

    51. Re:Kid's artwork? by TapeCutter · · Score: 2

      "Rediculous" is the highest level of ridiculousness, there's also "Yellowdiculous" (a bit silly) and "Greendiculous" (sober)

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    52. Re:Kid's artwork? by Belial6 · · Score: 2
      I am not arguing that many kids are not forced into public school. I am just pointing out the the parent poster is incorrect in their belief that

      even 'private tutoring' requires them to come into schools for their standardized testing

      I then explain why some people think that it is a legal requirement. Standardized testing is not a legal requirement, it is (as you tried to point out) a practical requirement for all of those kids who are not fortunate enough to escape the public education system.

    53. Re:Kid's artwork? by MacGyver2210 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It's actually quite uncommon. Of the probably ten large (multimillion-dollar, international) corporations I have worked for, only one had this provision.

      I do software development - one of the most contentious patent fields right now, and probably the easiest field to slyly slip away with some company property(code) and do what you will with it. The one that did have that provision was a short contract, so I never really had a chance to work on anything out-of-office that they would want.

      It shows active malice and contempt toward your employees to say something they make in their free time, at home, with their own materials, is your property. If I ever go back on the job hunt, I sure as hell won't be pursuing any jobs with that clause.

      Telling me anything I code in my free time at home is theirs would mean I don't code in my free time at home. Me not coding at home would eventually make me loathe the company, and I'd probably just end up quitting in frustration so I can have my free time to myself again. Not a super productive environment for employees.

      --
      If the only way you can accept an assertion is by faith, then you are conceding that it can't be taken on its own merits
    54. Re:Kid's artwork? by MacGyver2210 · · Score: 4, Informative

      In the US, it's not just as simple as crossing it out and signing the contract. For striking something from an official contract to actually modify the contract, you need the other party to agree to each change as well.

      This is usually done by striking out a clause and having both parties initial it, or by reprinting the contract with the changes included. I have signed several modified contracts, and all I had to do was get the employer to initial the parts I crossed out(which, as we had discussed it beforehand, they happily did).

      Don't be afraid to talk to whoever is providing the contract. They may understand where you're coming from and help with the modified contract, and if they don't you may not want to work with them after all.

      --
      If the only way you can accept an assertion is by faith, then you are conceding that it can't be taken on its own merits
    55. Re:Kid's artwork? by Lothsahn · · Score: 2

      ...or you could just go work for a company where they're reasonable. I've negotiated two changes to my employment agreement with my current company. One was before hiring on, and one was after. In both cases, I felt the original conditions of the employment agreement were reasonable, but in my certain circumstance I needed them changed. The company, seeing my (reasonable) requests, was happy to honor them.

      Now, if you're working at (insert huge company here that's too large, cumbersome, and inefficient to be reasonable), then I suppose a lawyer might be in order... But I would say it's probably better to negotiate first (privately consulting with a lawyer, if necessary) rather than look like you're lawyer-happy. I could definitely see some people getting scared off at the first mention of lawyers.

      Just my 2c...

      --
      -=Lothsahn=-
    56. Re:Kid's artwork? by MacGyver2210 · · Score: 1

      The default position is that work you do for your employer is theirs.

      "work you do for your employer" would be considered work you do, in the course of performing your job, at the employer's facilities. I don't argue with that - that work should belong to the employer.

      What I do argue with is the idea that - by default, according to you - the employer can claim ownership of anything you create at home in your free time as well. That's simply not true, and is not a good way to keep happy, productive employees.

      --
      If the only way you can accept an assertion is by faith, then you are conceding that it can't be taken on its own merits
    57. Re:Kid's artwork? by smi.james.th · · Score: 1

      Most universities claim ownership of works created by students under the auspices of their classes. I encountered that while I was studying, and even queried the university's IP people, stuff which the students do on their own time is their own though. I think a school would probably get away with something similar.

      --
      One thing I know, and that is that I am ignorant...
    58. Re:Kid's artwork? by Ying+Hu · · Score: 3, Interesting

      My school system (not in California) does not have any such claims in their employment contract, but does include such language in their Acceptable Use Policy for the computers and the school network - they claim anything stored on the school network is theirs. This has made me much more reluctant to put anything I create onto the network, but the part I find funny (and amazing) is that there is plenty of commercial stuff stored on our network servers for use by the teachers - videos from educational companies, Advanced Placement test materials, etc. I'm pretty sure the Educational Testing Service would object to my school claiming ownership over an AP test they have copyright to, and I'm sure the video companies would for their materials. This is the ridiculous level the f--ing lawyers and our copyright laws have brought us too - Orwellian newspeak meanings to our language (WE own it ALL!), OR, everyone is guilty, period (of course, the whole point of Orwellian newspeak was that everyone was, indeed, guilty, unless OK'd by Big Brother).

    59. Re:Kid's artwork? by DKlineburg · · Score: 1

      And I probably shouldn't have wasted time replying that I agree with you. I guess there is a certain level that might be expected? But really? Everyone knows what LOL, ROFL, and many other things are. If you can read it enough to complain, than it doesn't matter. How many pictures have been posted everywhere saying how smart the brain is understanding the language? Oh well. There went 2 mins. And speel cheek doesn't lick mins.

      --
      Memory is deceptive because it is colored by today's events. - Albert Einstein
    60. Re:Kid's artwork? by DKlineburg · · Score: 1

      And I'm able to make sure we take down the giant goblin at the end of the raid. Everyone needs the Spell Checker (tm) add on for there favorite Fantasy MMO(RPG).

      --
      Memory is deceptive because it is colored by today's events. - Albert Einstein
    61. Re:Kid's artwork? by Loki_666 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I did this once. Spoke to them about it. Said i didn't like it and would only accept a modified version which said they only owned my creations if i used their time or equipment. They agreed.

    62. Re:Kid's artwork? by Belial6 · · Score: 2

      it's worth noting that standardized testing may not be required in YOUR state, but the laws vary wildly from state to state.

      Fair enough. The point was that most people seem to think that the standardized testing that the federal government pushes is a legal requirement. The federal government doesn't have the authority to require testing, so they take money from the local economies, and only give it back if the public schools 'voluntarily' do the standardized testing.

      Legal requirements are a state issue, so the feds can only 'suggest' requirements.

    63. Re:Kid's artwork? by the+biologist · · Score: 1

      HQ can claim whatever they want. It has little relevance to your legal rights.

    64. Re:Kid's artwork? by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 1

      If the contract states that only X has the authority to alter the contract and Y tries to alter it what does that have to do with your rights?

      --
      A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
    65. Re:Kid's artwork? by the+biologist · · Score: 1

      If a contract is not legally able to take away your rights, then it can't take away your rights even if it claims to do so.

    66. Re:Kid's artwork? by CaptQuark · · Score: 2

      Obviously yours doesn't or you wouldn't have used such a horrible, run-on sentence.

    67. Re:Kid's artwork? by xenobyte · · Score: 1

      There are no age clause in the Berne Convention. You as a person owns the copyright to everything you create, except where contractual obligations apply. This could be an employment contract or perhaps a recording contract with a studio or a casting contract with a movie studio. But children cannot sign contracts and I'm sure public schools doesn't have contracts for pupils in any case, which basically means that the copyright to the works produced reside with the children themselves. Attempting to circumvent copyrights is a serious matter, especially if the victim is a child. THINK OF THE CHILDREN!

      --
      "For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." -- H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) --
    68. Re:Kid's artwork? by bwcbwc · · Score: 2

      Even more-so, copyrighting the kids work sounds like child labor slavery.
      1) Kids are required to go to school, and can be severely punished if they fail to attend.
      2) Kids are not paid to go to school.
      3) Kids and their parents are not able to negotiate assignment of copyright or licensing with the board, the right would just be taken.
      Sure sounds like slavery to me...

      Plus, if the school wants to get the rights to use a kid's work, images, etc., there is already a parental waiver process in most school districts to allow this. This is a pure money grab. The whole thing is so crass that I suspect including the kids' work in the plan is just a straw man for the more substantive grabbing of teachers' work.

      --
      We are the 198 proof..
    69. Re:Kid's artwork? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As the parent of a home schooled child, I can tell you that children are not required to do standardized testing.

      This depends entirely on the state you live in.

      In Washington, a student is required to pass a certain number of standardized tests in order to obtain a HS diploma.

      More information can be found here:

      http://www.k12.wa.us/Resources/default.aspx#WASL

    70. Re:Kid's artwork? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they didn't sign your modified version then it doesn't apply to them but if they did they should still be bound to it.

      After all if you sign a contract even if you don't read all the terms you're still bound to it, so why should the other party be exempt?

      If ISPs, Telcos, Banks etc can get away with changing contracts, T&Cs and fine print, we should be able to do so too.

    71. Re:Kid's artwork? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The teachers are employees, but they're not creating anything either. Their school plans, the lessons, the experience needed to do all those things, all belong to them, because the school had no part in their creation.

      When a school starts handing out to teachers folders, with the lesson plans, with everything they must do, they can go ahead and copyright it. They'll fail the most basic function of the school, which I always thought, would be education, but they'll totally be making money.

    72. Re:Kid's artwork? by azalin · · Score: 1

      While we're already THINKING OF THE CHILDREN, think about all the pictures kids these days take of their peers and themselves - turning the US school system into the greatest owner of inappropriate underage pictures. Wouldn't that be a nice headline?

    73. Re:Kid's artwork? by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      In Washington, a student is required to pass a certain number of standardized tests in order to obtain a HS diploma.

      You don't really need a high school diploma, though, do you? Maybe that also depends on the state, but I'm not sure. In my state at least, I have seen home schooled kids who simply never bothered getting a diploma or a GED, and they were still able to get jobs and/or get into college.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    74. Re:Kid's artwork? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Grammar checkers are not so advanced and success are not gauranteed.

    75. Re:Kid's artwork? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it's worth noting that standardized testing may not be required in YOUR state, but the laws vary wildly from state to state.

      Fair enough. The point was that most people seem to think that the standardized testing that the federal government pushes is a legal requirement. The federal government doesn't have the authority to require testing, so they take money from the local economies, and only give it back if the public schools 'voluntarily' do the standardized testing.

      Legal requirements are a state issue, so the feds can only 'suggest' requirements.

      There's your problem: perhaps the US needs to get their shit together and standardize a bit more. If you pretend to be one country, it might make sense to actually act like one country, instead of 52.

      Standardized tests make things easier for everyone: students can more easily prepare, teachers do not have to come up with specific tests, universities and employers do not have to analyze every single school in the country to know who to admit, parents have more certainty about their kids' abilities, as well as what the school has to offer.

      What's the disadvantage? Potential for corruption exists irrespective of the test system. Adding new material to the curriculum may take slightly longer, but it is still more efficient than adding it in a potentially different way in each state.

    76. Re:Kid's artwork? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ad drink tea!

      Pip, pip!

    77. Re:Kid's artwork? by steelyeyedmissileman · · Score: 0

      You assume I didn't recognize the humor.

      Actually, whether the OP intended the error or not, this is a good example of irony. If intended, OP is using verbal irony, saying one thing while intending or implying another: says that spell checkers prevent spelling errors while using a perfect example of a spelling error and checker can't find. If unintended, it's great example of dramatic irony: making an erroneous statement in a situation where readers are aware of the error.

      Either way, I do recognize irony. Irony would never punch someone in the face; that wouldn't be subtle enough. I didn't expect the down-mod. Oh well, life goes on!

    78. Re:Kid's artwork? by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      What's the disadvantage?

      The tests are awful to begin with and it might interfere with the parents' plans.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    79. Re:Kid's artwork? by DMiax · · Score: 1

      Because it's their job? I mean, I don't condone overreaching, but it goes both ways: why should the school pay them if their work does not belong to the school? Especially if their work is based on the means and equipment afforded by the school.

      OTOH I strongly believe that what you do in your own time with your own means should be your property. Nor the work of a student should be property of the school. Of course, I can see the mental process of some manager thinking "we own the teacher's work, why not the students', since they are even below a teacher?". It would be no use explaining that students are not employees but, in a sense, customers. I fear there is no reasoning with this type of people.

    80. Re:Kid's artwork? by DirtyLiar · · Score: 1

      I know with a spell checker your gauranteed to spell words correctly!

      Even your misspelled words will still be spelled correctly!

      --

      THINK! It's patriotic

    81. Re:Kid's artwork? by flyneye · · Score: 1

      Having come from Podunk, years ago, I understand what you say completely.
      This story however, paints a picture that doesn't resolve in any good motives.
      An example should be made loudly and publicly.

      --
      *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
    82. Re:Kid's artwork? by DirtyLiar · · Score: 1

      I rewrote that clause to specifically say that all my work was my own, as long as it was not directly assigned to me, and got my boss to sign it.

      Was easier than I immagined it would be.

      --

      THINK! It's patriotic

    83. Re:Kid's artwork? by DoctorBonzo · · Score: 1

      I believe most universities also claim copyright over not only all student's works, but all professor's class-related works as well. Check your local T & C.

      I think this pretty clearly sucks; having the policy devolve to secondary and elementary institutions underscores the absurdity.

      Maybe this will lead to a global debate and re-evaluation. I'm not holding my breath...

    84. Re:Kid's artwork? by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      So let's say a teacher is employed to teach sixth grade science for School A. The teacher teaches for 10 years, building up a series of lesson plans, test questions to use, projects to assign, etc. The teacher then goes to work for School B. Does this teacher need to start from scratch rebuilding everything? What if School B is in the same district? Are the materials owned by the school, the district, or the government (if they are public schools - which the article is about)?

      If a teacher moved from School A to School B and recreated some lesson plans from memory, would he/she be open to a copyright infringement lawsuit? Would a teacher who changed schools become a liability for their new school? If so, why not just hire a new teacher out of school with no copyright infringement liability? If put in place, this policy would cripple teachers who tried to move from one teacher job to another.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    85. Re:Kid's artwork? by JohnRoss1968 · · Score: 1

      If after reading this article the most important thing to cross you mind is a spelling error, then you need to do the rest of us a favor and die in a car fire.

    86. Re:Kid's artwork? by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 1

      Because it's their job? I mean, I don't condone overreaching, but it goes both ways: why should the school pay them if their work does not belong to the school?

      It's normally the subject of an explicit agreement between the employee and the employer. If they do the work specifically for the school, such as writing a lesson plan for the classes they teach, then yeah, I would say the district should automatically own rights to that. If the work is tangential to their work for the district and isn't pursuant to some work assigned to them, the courts aren't going to presume that the district has any rights unless they can show an agreement in force stating that the employee cedes them.

      And what I said is still the case. If you take away somebody's ownership of their own work, they are less interested in doing it. It's human nature.

    87. Re:Kid's artwork? by stevew · · Score: 1

      In CA we've had protection from this nonsense since the 1980s.

      It is a reasonable for a company to claim ownership of something you do on their time. It is completely unfair for them to claim ownership of things you develop on your own time. In my mind, even if they are home work assignments, anything designed by the kids is theirs. End of discussion.

      However, teachers doing lesson plans on their own time for their employment? That becomes gray in my mind. I guess the best policy is get your work done during work hours. I suspect that isn't a realistic statement though.

      --
      Have you compiled your kernel today??
    88. Re:Kid's artwork? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Claiming ownership of the student's creations is rediculous.

      Not quite as rediculous as constantly spelling ridiculous as rediculous. It is worthy of ridicule to spell ridiculous as rediculous when even Firefox spell checking catches the error.

    89. Re:Kid's artwork? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *Most AMERICAN tech companies claim ownership of anything created by employees, whether created at work or on their own time.

      FTFY

    90. Re:Kid's artwork? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've been a software dev in silicon valley for 20 years and have never been asked to sign away any rights to anything I made or did in my spare time. And if I ever was, I would tell them to go take a flying fuck at the moon - when I stopped laughing.

      Sure they own what you code for them on their time and on their equipment - if you dont know that going in your'e an idiot. But anything you write on your own time on your own machine at home? Of course they have no claim to it, probably not even if you signed something (like an idiot) giving it to them.

    91. Re:Kid's artwork? by hedwards · · Score: 1

      As opposed to when they sue you because what you're trying to sell is very similar to what you were paid to do and you end up losing a few extra hundred thousand in legal fees because the line wasn't clear.

      Yeah, that's much better for you.

    92. Re:Kid's artwork? by hedwards · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I'm pretty sure that's not true. I'm a teacher and the schools only demand that I give them the plans for classes I give. And even then I'm being paid for the time I spend creating the plans. They're not getting things out of me that I worked on in my spare time. Those things belong to me.

    93. Re:Kid's artwork? by ultranova · · Score: 1

      If I ever go back on the job hunt, I sure as hell won't be pursuing any jobs with that clause.

      And perhaps you can afford to be picky, for now. But with ever increasing unemployment, how long will that remain true? And for how many people is it true even today?

      Unreasonable employment contracts exist because there's a class war going on, and the 1% are winning. And they'll continue to exist as long as this remains the case - for the foreseeable future, as is.

      Not a super productive environment for employees.

      It might be perfectly rational for a feudal lord to implement a measure that lowers productivity but helps keep the serfs in line.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    94. Re:Kid's artwork? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tried that. Negotiating. Contract gave them everything I did, at home, in my spare time, etc. I couldn't even contribute a two-line patch to the Linux kernel. I made some suggestions towards amending the contract. The company immediately responded by terminating my offer of employment and showing me out. There was no talking things out. It was a he's asking questions get rid of him NOW philosophy. Nearly bankrupted me. Almost lost the house. (Nobody else was hiring.)

      Then again, that company was doing Linux programming. But, as I learned that first day just before they terminated my offer of employment, we were all working on Windows boxes running some commercial (very buggy) X-client software and going in remotely to a single shared Linux box. I wonder how they are doing these days, with Win8?

      One goal of these we-own-your-life contracts is to prevent you from doing things on your own time. Your skills rapidly become obsolete and you have no alternate employment options, nor any way to legally and provably obtain the skills necessary to find another job. Thus retention is achieved in an otherwise highly toxic and abusive workplace.

    95. Re:Kid's artwork? by helix2301 · · Score: 1

      6th grade kid will design an app and the school will solve there budget issues by selling the app on the apple and android app store. Sounds shady to me.

    96. Re:Kid's artwork? by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 1

      You're not getting this... there's nothing in saying that only corporate HQ can approve contract alterations that infringes on your rights. You can do whatever the hell you want to the contract, but only corporate HQ can approve those alterations otherwise it's still the original contract.

      --
      A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
    97. Re:Kid's artwork? by Rysc · · Score: 1

      You must not live in the USA. I recommend you reserve judgement.

      Standardized tests just cause schools to focus on scoring well and ignore actually educating students. If your school does not do well on standardized tests they take money away from you, period. If your school does well you can employ more teachers at better salaries, build more schools, have more programs like music and sports, etc.. The frenzy to "win" at tests is incredible. I've seen teachers all but GIVE students the answers ahead of time in a so-called "prep" test in the hopes that woefully undereducated students will pass muster on test day. Nothing else in a public school is more critical than getting a good score (which means good percentages and good averages across the student body) on test day. NOTHING. Not student welfare, not knowledge, nothing.

      --
      I want my Cowboyneal
    98. Re:Kid's artwork? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's a rather bold statement to make from someone who calls himself "ameoba" :^>

    99. Re:Kid's artwork? by sjw02001 · · Score: 1

      Well... it depends. If you're at a research university, your tuition dollars may not pay very much of your professor's salary by the time you add in any government funding and other outside grants, as well as endowment funds. The work they do preparing for class we can argue about, but their research output was very likely paid for with a non-tuition source. And how do we define work done for teaching? Should each student have access to lecture notes? Old quizzes? Final exams? (Professors really hate the last two because then they can't reuse things without rampant cheating, and after a few years in some subjects it gets hard to write truly new questions.) What about e-mails to another student refining an explanation that was given in class? Recordings of discussions in office hours? These are work products from the class you are taking. Careful, you'll have to edit out any portions that have FERPA data...

      I can tell you I've watched more than one professor freak out when I explain to them how much access the university has to their work products, electronic or old-school. They don't like it at all. It doesn't make them right or wrong, but this is far from settled to both sides' satisfaction.

    100. Re:Kid's artwork? by Zordak · · Score: 1

      Except that even 'private tutoring' requires them to come into schools for their standardized testing (At least from the few people I know who did home schooling.)

      Depends on the state. We home school our 6th grader in Texas, and all we had to do was send a letter to her school telling them that she wouldn't be starting 6th grade there because we were doing home school. But I have a friend who home schooled her kids in Hawaii and was required to get formal lesson plans approved by the state and participate in standardized testing. As a broad-brush general rule, "conservative" states seem to more-or-less let parents teach kids what they want, while "liberal" states seem to be more keen on ensuring that the child is getting a "state-approved" education. For better or worse, on either side.

      --

      Today's Sesame Street was brought to you by the number e.
    101. Re:Kid's artwork? by Zordak · · Score: 1

      And so it is in more civilized countries.

      Like the United States, where the company only owns copyright to whatever you do in the course and scope of employment. They may not even own patents related to your job if you were not "employed to ivnent." Which is why it's in everybody's interest to have a clear employment agreement that says what the company owns and what you own. Most companies will say that anything you do while in their employ that relates to their business is theirs, regardless of when you do it. That's pretty reasonable. They're paying you a salary to further their business interests. In exchange, you give them anything you do while receiving that salary that reasonably furthers those business interests. And you have a fiduciary duty not to compete with your employer, so it could get sticky for you to own the stuff anyway. But if you write the Great American Novel, most of them won't claim to own it. I've seen only a few employers who claim ownership of everything an employee does while in their employ. But hey, freedom of contract. If you want to work for an employer that claims ownership of everything you do, think or say while in their employ, that's what you signed up for.

      --

      Today's Sesame Street was brought to you by the number e.
    102. Re:Kid's artwork? by Zordak · · Score: 1

      If the invention is done on the employee's own time and equipment and is not related to or derived from the employee's work at the company, the company has no right of ownership:

      Most employment agreements I've seen go this route anyway. If you work on anything related to their business, it's theirs. But if you have side stuff going on not related to their business, they're not going to claim it. That's most employers. I can think of one local company where I live that requires employees to assign all copyrights and inventions acquired while in their employ to them. In Texas, that's enforceable as far as I know.

      --

      Today's Sesame Street was brought to you by the number e.
    103. Re:Kid's artwork? by the+biologist · · Score: 1

      You have the right to change the contract, they have to then approve it. The original statement was the claim that only HQ had the right to change it. These are different scenarios.

    104. Re:Kid's artwork? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But, the students are not employees, and signed no waiver when they enrolled. Claiming ownership of the student's creations is rediculous.

      Signing a waiver isn't really necessary, the students are usually issued a Student Handbook which spells out the school's policies--enrollment implies that the student agrees to adhere to the school policies. So, they only have to include a "Copyright Ownership" section in the handbook.

      Claiming ownership over a student's works isn't ridiculous. Most college and university copyright ownership policies state that if the school's resources are used to produce the work then the school owns the copyright (they usually mean substantial resources, not something like using a school computer, printer, paper, etc.). But, typically for things like course work the student owns the copyright and the school is granted a license use and reproduce the work.

  3. Copyright and minors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How can a minor cede copyright of their work legally? This could really be abused, particularly with the ease of self-publishing books and software, an industrious teen could get shafted hard.

    1. Re:Copyright and minors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      an industrious teen could get shafted hard.

      /fapfapfap

    2. Re:Copyright and minors by Seumas · · Score: 1

      The school now owns the nude photos of children that they spy on with their school-provided laptop webcams while they're home in their bedroom.

      http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100221/2118128243.shtml

    3. Re:Copyright and minors by oobayly · · Score: 1

      Even better - the school owns the nude photos that the children make of themselves on their mobile phones, thereby is involved in the making and distribution of child pornography.

  4. Yeah, fuck off. by serviscope_minor · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Profane, but seriously, fuck off.

    On what grounds do they thing they possibly own student work?

    I can vaguely see an exceptionally unethical argument for teachers work, but student work? It's not like they have a choice as to whether they attend and it sure as hell is not work for hire.

    What is wrong with these people?

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
    1. Re:Yeah, fuck off. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "The misery that is now upon us is but the passing of greed."
          - Charlie Chaplin in The Great Dictator

    2. Re:Yeah, fuck off. by hedwards · · Score: 3, Informative

      This has been the case for a while where student work is turned over to a plagiarism screening service which then owns a copy of the work in perpetuity, whether or not the student consents to it.

    3. Re:Yeah, fuck off. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Owning a copy of it is quite different than owning the copyright on it.

    4. Re:Yeah, fuck off. by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      Owning a copy of it is quite different than owning the copyright on it.

      It is an inbetween state. The plagarism guys claim to own more than a single copy, but they don't claim unlimited unlimited rights to redistribute.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    5. Re:Yeah, fuck off. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This has been the case for a while where student work is turned over to a plagiarism screening service which then owns a copy of the work in perpetuity, whether or not the student consents to it.

      That's a specific exception to reproduction right. For the limited purpose of checking it for plagiarism.

    6. Re:Yeah, fuck off. by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      Actually, on what grounds do they own ideas? Oh... copyright. Right. It plagues even education.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    7. Re:Yeah, fuck off. by ScentCone · · Score: 0

      I can vaguely see an exceptionally unethical argument for teachers work

      It's called "work for hire," and it's entirely common, and understandable. Someone else is paying you a salary to produce things for the organization that's paying you to do so. It's their work, because they hired you to produce it on their dime. Of course you can negotiate an employment contract that takes those rights away from the people who pay you to create the work, but that can be pretty hard to settle when you're dealing with the government (the school system being part of the government).

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    8. Re:Yeah, fuck off. by ineffablepwnage · · Score: 2

      Semi-off topic: Could it still be considered a copyright violation? They are using someone else's work for monetary gain (I'm assuming they make some money off of their service), so shouldn't people created the works be able to object to that, or is there something in copyright law that allows the plagiarism screening services to do that?

    9. Re:Yeah, fuck off. by The_Revelation · · Score: 1

      Yep, I agree. You do not steal rights from the defenceless. You can sign a contract at 18, you can't at 8. F&%k anyone who even considers stealing the ideas of children and commercialize them! Laws exist principally to protect children from exploitation. Without that you have no legal system.

    10. Re:Yeah, fuck off. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So I guess it's okay for the school to plagiarize your work as long as they keep you from plagiarizing?

    11. Re:Yeah, fuck off. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It always bothered me. I gave no permission for a 3rd party to keep copies of my writing for future commercial use. I couldn't remember ever being asked to do the same writing assignment twice, but I always hoped I would, so I could resubmit my own work. Teachers rarely specify that you can't reuse your own work.

      Then, when it comes back as "copied", sue the ever-loving shit out of everyone.

      A guy can daydream.

    12. Re:Yeah, fuck off. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're part of a special protected class endowed with the important task of educating the children.

      What's wrong with these people? Everything.

      What, you thought they were dog-tagging kids with RFID so they could just keep attendance? They're dog-tagging them because they think they own your kids; they indoctrinate them, make them think without school they are nothing, then they sell them debilitating school loan and fill their minds with garbage bullshit in college. If you have something to say about it, the cops and Child protective services come to your door.

      There is no free market competition in public schools, and if you try to force that down their throats, they will fucking destroy you because they don't want to exist in normal society.

    13. Re:Yeah, fuck off. by serviscope_minor · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's called "work for hire," and it's entirely common, and understandable.

      Yeah, like I said.

      The teachers are paid to teach, not produce "content" or whatever. The school owning the lesson plan means that the teacher can't take it with them when they leave. That would certainly restrict the mobility of teachers if all their accumulated materials in that regard are tied to the school. IOt does not benefit the school, teachers or pupils.

      Remember: teachers are hired as teachers: not creative workers in the sense of producing work for hire.

      As it happens, where I come from and the organisation that I used to teach for did exactly the opposite. The lecturers own their own lecture notes. They could take them away after leaving, or turn them into a book. Quite often, the good long running lecture courses (i.e. the ones that did prove popular and effective over the years) were turned into books. Invariably the lecturers published the book through the university even though there was no need to do so, because they made it easy and worthwhile. Funny thing that if the university did assert copyright, then they would have got squat.

      And it's not that bizarre system popular in the US where the hapless students are forced to fork out hundreds for a bad book which changes frequently, just to pass the course.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    14. Re:Yeah, fuck off. by azalin · · Score: 1

      So, what happens if a student works for a company in his free time. Programming an app/website, drawing comics or designing skateboards for example. Whose owns these works?

    15. Re:Yeah, fuck off. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it isn't. They just have a license on the document, analogous to when you buy music.

    16. Re:Yeah, fuck off. by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      sending a copy off to a plagiarism detecting service? yeah, it's copyright violation. with current state in USA it's probaly wire fraud as well.. and misuse of computer systems etc.

      of course those services can't work without it..

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    17. Re:Yeah, fuck off. by ScentCone · · Score: 0

      The teachers are paid to teach

      And in the course of doing so, they write things that are put to work by the school, a teaching institution. Things that are used in the process of evolving the school's collected body of lessons, procedures, and the rest - those are things the teachers are paid a salary to produce, along with their other duties. You seem to be implying that if the teachers were employed as grocery store clerks, they'd still be preparing essay tests, lesson plans, and school program material on the side, just for fun and personal expression. Absurd.

      If a teacher has a personal hobby of writing essay test questions or clever math test word problems, and it's such a passion that they want to continue to do so above and beyond doing the exact same thing for pay by taxpayers that employ them, then that rare teacher just needs to negotiate that language into their employment contract.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    18. Re:Yeah, fuck off. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps if somebody is forcing the artist to hand over the rights without being paid for it and is in fact not only not being paid, but is being charged for the privilege of creating works that are then stolen.

    19. Re:Yeah, fuck off. by ScentCone · · Score: 0

      Hilarious that somebody considers that flamebait. It's basic facts! It must be hard to go through life considering every presentation of basic information to be inflaming.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  5. They can't just declare this. by John+Hasler · · Score: 3, Informative

    Well, they can, but it won't be legally binding until they get the employees and students to agree to assign their copyrights.

    --
    Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    1. Re:They can't just declare this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And then it goes to court and the court agrees with the school. Why is it people still think ANY part of the government is looking out for them? How blatent can they be and people just act like, no that couldn't really happen. They are talking about SEIZING all pensions to help with the spending problem the government has, they are talking about disarming you while writing themselves lifetime secret service armed guard protection, they put US citizens on kill lists without a trial, they sue Arizona for enforcing the law, they refuse to answer the simplest questions about gun running or the death of an ambassador.

      Its now gotten to the point where it is so stupid that the local school board realizes they have unlimited power that is just there for the taking. No one will be allowed to challenge this, and anyone who does will be prosecuted and threatened with years of jail time until they drop their case. They have shown they are a dictatorship and the people will protect them because going against it labels you a "bigot".

      Suck it up and take it serf.

    2. Re:They can't just declare this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Well, they can, but it won't be legally binding until they get the employees and students to agree to assign their copyrights.

      Except for the small fact that minors cannot be legally bound to a contract.

    3. Re:They can't just declare this. by houghi · · Score: 1

      Copyright is implied, unless you decide otherwise. The reason that people add the copyright sign or add the words and the year make it easier to proof, but that does not make it so.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    4. Re:They can't just declare this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if you're so smart, why aren't you rich? standard question i throw to know-it-alls like you. i can't wait for the excuses

    5. Re:They can't just declare this. by wisnoskij · · Score: 1

      Well, I am no law expert. But for items like tests, which the school board pays the teachers to create, I am pretty sure they already own them.

      For lesson plans, it would depend on the wording of the employee contract, I imagine and your interpretation of the law. It is reasonable to assume that an employee might own a method he developed to do a job, but the contract very well might state that making a lesson plan is a part of the job since every one knows you NEED a lesson plan to teach a class. And even if it did not, it could easily be considered a requirement of fulfilling your contract, and therefore legally the schools IP.

      --
      Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    6. Re:They can't just declare this. by stephanruby · · Score: 1

      Well, they can, but it won't be legally binding until they get the employees and students to agree to assign their copyrights.

      A contract signed by a minor isn't binding!

      Hopefully, this is how it works in Canada as well.

    7. Re:They can't just declare this. by JustOK · · Score: 1

      Cuz being rich ain't necessarily the goal, idjit.

      --
      rewriting history since 2109
    8. Re:They can't just declare this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I actually am pretty well off. I started watching the news to see where the scams are and invest to where the money is being printed and handed out. Works great.

      No excuses, just results. I didn't have enough to start with to make it big, but when I see the government go after Ford the way they did about 5 years ago I made $40k off a $4k investment and about 6 months of waiting. The system is corrupt, you either accept it or work with it. I would probably make more if it weren't corrupt but you jackasses keep voting in corrupt people, so I have to work with it.

      Today, you invest in blue chips and take your portion of the monthly $84 Billion the government is printing and dumping in Fannie Mae (hard to get part of that) and the stock market in an attempt to make Obama look good and you will be pulling in the green. Haven't you noticed we have negative GDP and record high DOW and S&P? Doesn't make sense unless they are pumping it up to make the White House look good. Either jump in to take your piece of the pie or take it in the ass later when they raise taxes to pay for it in a couple years.

    9. Re:They can't just declare this. by gandhi_2 · · Score: 1

      ...although courts tend to favor "pinkie swearing" in cases like this.

    10. Re:They can't just declare this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How do you know how much money I have, Coward?

    11. Re:They can't just declare this. by mdielmann · · Score: 1

      Well, they can, but it won't be legally binding until they get the employees and students to agree to assign their copyrights.

      A contract signed by a minor isn't binding!

      Hopefully, this is how it works in Canada as well.

      What does Canada have to do with this? Prince George's County is in Maryland.

      --
      Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
    12. Re:They can't just declare this. by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 1

      Vonnegut said it best with regards to that gem...

    13. Re:They can't just declare this. by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      They have shown they are a dictatorship and the people will protect them because going against it labels you a "bigot".

      The root problem with US politics is the number of people who are willing to give credence to the kind of myopic bullshit you just posted. You and your ilk are fearfull because you project your own meglomania onto others and then without a shread of evidence conclude that they will act the way you would (if given the chance).

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    14. Re:They can't just declare this. by codegen · · Score: 1

      Hopefully, this is how it works in Canada as well.

      I'm not sure where you got Canada from. The article is about Prince George County in Virginia.

      --
      Atlas stands on the earth and carries the celestial sphere on his shoulders.
  6. students and teachers aren't the same by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The first-grader and the teen aren't "employees". Money flows from the students to the school, not the other way around.

    1. Re:students and teachers aren't the same by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe they're thinking of changing this. Maybe they wish to pay students to attend school and produce imaginary property. /s

  7. PG County Maryland? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    That place is a shit hole, and I wouldn't worry about them producing anything fit for public consumption in the near future.

    1. Re:PG County Maryland? by gmhowell · · Score: 2

      That place is a shit hole, and I wouldn't worry about them producing anything fit for public consumption in the near future.

      Speaking as a life long resident of the state and former spouse of a former employee of PGCPS, this comment is woefully underrated and 100% correct.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  8. Child Labor by cervesaebraciator · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If, therefore, they do claim ownership, the parents should bring a case against the school system for violation of child labor laws.

    1. Re:Child Labor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      A class action.

    2. Re:Child Labor by robthebloke · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Although it also works in reverse. When I graduated uni, one company I applied to for work, took my major project, and started using it in production. Athough I didn't get the job, I was tipped off by a friend who'd started working there, that my work had formed the backbone of their new product. The uni's legal team got involved, and I ended up with a nice handsome payout for my efforts a few months later! :)

    3. Re:Child Labor by theedgeofoblivious · · Score: 1

      You can't do that. You signed away your right to class action lawsuit on the registration form for the site. You have to go through arbitration, which the business wins 97% of the time.

    4. Re:Child Labor by Deep+Esophagus · · Score: 1

      Whoosh. No worries, AC, *I* got the joke.

    5. Re:Child Labor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you missed his funny...about schools and class..

    6. Re:Child Labor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      In this case, what the school is proposing is that your major project from university (assuming you created the project during your time in the university) would belong to the university. So, you would not have received the payout. The university would have received the payout, and you probably would have been sued for copyright infringement of the work you created while in university.

    7. Re:Child Labor by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

      If, therefore, they do claim ownership, the parents should bring a case against the school system for violation of child labor laws.

      What do pregnant teens have to do with copyrights?

    8. Re:Child Labor by crypticedge · · Score: 1

      You missed his joke though. Don't worry, it'll hit you.

    9. Re:Child Labor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And then you learn but choose to ignore the fact that its damn near impossible to sign away your right to sue. Just because something is in a contract does not mean its binding, even if you sign it with permanent marker in huge letters.. But, if your purpose is to have something to snivel about...

    10. Re:Child Labor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Woosh

    11. Re:Child Labor by Zordak · · Score: 1

      No, the point is that the university gives students and professors some partial interest in the works. If they had taken something he owned individually, yes, he would own 100%, but robthebloke probably wouldn't have the inclination or resources to pursue a lawsuit. (What's 100% of 0?) But since the university had a partial interest, they took over the legal representation, went after infringers for him, and at the end of the day sent him a nice bonus check, presumably for little extra effort on his part. So in this case, he "won."

      --

      Today's Sesame Street was brought to you by the number e.
  9. Theft? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is why parents need to have a choice of schools. This is much closer to theft than filesharing is.

  10. On the other hand... by Soluzar · · Score: 1, Informative

    This seems to be only about "work produced for the school", meaning papers for class, lesson plans and the like. It doesn't seem as though they plan to lay claim to your Great American Novel (TM) if you plan on writing one while enrolled or employed there.

    1. Re:On the other hand... by chrismcb · · Score: 1

      I don't think attending the school and working on a school project is considered "work for hire." So, I guess the school system can say whatever it wants. It can claim PI is 3, but it doesn't make it so

    2. Re:On the other hand... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This seems to be only about "work produced for the school", meaning papers for class, lesson plans and the like. It doesn't seem as though they plan to lay claim to your Great American Novel (TM) if you plan on writing one while enrolled or employed there.

      I maintain the copyright on any papers I write. The school district has no claim of ownership, unless they want to draw up a contract to pay me to write the papers.

    3. Re:On the other hand... by Drishmung · · Score: 2

      This seems to be only about "work produced for the school", meaning papers for class, lesson plans and the like. It doesn't seem as though they plan to lay claim to your Great American Novel (TM) if you plan on writing one while enrolled or employed there.

      For the pupils at least, that claim also likely has no standing, notwithstanding any delusional beliefs to the contrary of the board.

      As per analysis of the contract in the Hobbit

      All contracts require some consideration from all parties to the contract. Consideration, in the contract sense, means a bargained-for performance or promise. Restatement (Second) of Contracts 71(1). Basically, this is something of value given or promised as part of the agreement. This can be anything that the parties agree is valuable; the classic example is a single peppercorn. Whitney v. Stearns, 16 Me. 394, 397 (1839).

      That means, the school has to explicitly give the pupils something in exchange for their copyright. 'Teaching' can't be it, since they are obliged to do that anyway.

      --
      Protoplasm. Quiet Protoplasm. I like quiet protoplasm.
    4. Re:On the other hand... by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 1

      This seems to be only about "work produced for the school", meaning papers for class, lesson plans and the like. It doesn't seem as though they plan to lay claim to your Great American Novel (TM) if you plan on writing one while enrolled or employed there.

      For the pupils at least, that claim also likely has no standing, notwithstanding any delusional beliefs to the contrary of the board.

      As per analysis of the contract in the Hobbit

      All contracts require some consideration from all parties to the contract. Consideration, in the contract sense, means a bargained-for performance or promise. Restatement (Second) of Contracts 71(1). Basically, this is something of value given or promised as part of the agreement. This can be anything that the parties agree is valuable; the classic example is a single peppercorn. Whitney v. Stearns, 16 Me. 394, 397 (1839).

      That means, the school has to explicitly give the pupils something in exchange for their copyright. 'Teaching' can't be it, since they are obliged to do that anyway.

      How about they get an A?

    5. Re:On the other hand... by Soluzar · · Score: 1

      Seems like the school are already obligated to grade work fairly and without preferential treatment.

    6. Re:On the other hand... by Soluzar · · Score: 1

      Apparently they do have a claim, or we wouldn't see this article. Whether the claim is valid or not is a matter I'm hardly qualified to judge. I'm just looking at what they appear to be claiming.

    7. Re:On the other hand... by azalin · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't that violate the whole concept of fair grading? Oh and therefor the education "contract"?

    8. Re:On the other hand... by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 1

      Where does it say that? I didn't get any such agreement from the school when I enrolled my kids.

    9. Re:On the other hand... by Soluzar · · Score: 1

      I admit that I'm only making an assumption, but I would have thought it was covered by law, and as such, no specific agreement is required.

      This link strongly implies that it's covered by the laws of the state, though I admit I don't know the specific laws of this state.

    10. Re:On the other hand... by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't that violate the whole concept of fair grading? Oh and therefor the education "contract"?

      "fair grading?"

      "education contract?

      I'm confused. You talk about these things as if they actually exist.

  11. Since they're funded by the government by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd think they were public domain.

    1. Re:Since they're funded by the government by tilante · · Score: 1

      Works created by and for the federal government are public domain; for state governments, it's determined by each state. Some make their publications public domain, others maintain copyright.

  12. Grad school employees and professors by davidwr · · Score: 1

    In the 1990s many universities made faculty and grad students who took research-assistantships assign copyrights for "relevant to their job" works even if they were done "on their own time." The logic was that the school was paying you for your brain, or at least the part of your brain related to your job, and your brain didn't punch a clock.

    I can see a K-12 school system asking teachers to assign copyrights to creative works that are relevant to their jobs, but not to things that are irrelevant. A 2nd grade teacher who does art work that isn't related to teaching 2nd graders shouldn't have to quit her job to keep the copyrights on her paintings. On the other hand, it is reasonable to tell new-hire or renewing-contract teacher who creates worksheets for use in the classroom that things she creates in the future will belong to the district.

    As for K-12 students, this is not only immoral but probably illegal: Until the age of 16 in most states, school attendance is mandatory. Up until high school graduation or a certain age cut-off, usually 21, it's an "entitlement" - teenagers over 16 have a legal right to finish a 12th grade education.

    Expect a judge to enjoin the district from claiming copyright on student works shortly. Expect either a negotiated agreement or a lawsuit and temporary injunction barring non-job-related forced copyright assignments within a few months.

    Expect high-quality teachers who earn extra money selling what they create to begin avoiding this district immediately.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    1. Re:Grad school employees and professors by penix1 · · Score: 1

      I can see a K-12 school system asking teachers to assign copyrights to creative works that are relevant to their jobs, but not to things that are irrelevant. A 2nd grade teacher who does art work that isn't related to teaching 2nd graders shouldn't have to quit her job to keep the copyrights on her paintings. On the other hand, it is reasonable to tell new-hire or renewing-contract teacher who creates worksheets for use in the classroom that things she creates in the future will belong to the district.

      And just how is that promoting anything school related off the clock? Many teachers spend hours off the clock developing innovative ways to teach their subjects. Often times their work load is such that they can't possibly complete their tasks without the extra hours. I see silly things like this rule stifling creative thinking more than promoting it.

      --
      This is a sig. This is only a sig. Had this been an actual sig you would have been informed where to tune for more sigs.
    2. Re:Grad school employees and professors by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      Many teachers spend hours off the clock developing innovative ways to teach their subjects.

      Salaried employees don't have a "clock" to be "off of." They wouldn't have created that system to improve their work if they weren't being paid to do that work in the first place. It is a logical argument to say that what they create as a result or effect of being paid belongs to the company that pays them.

      Often times their work load is such that they can't possibly complete their tasks without the extra hours.

      That's the problem with being a salaried employee and not a per-hour one. You don't have "off the clock".

      I see silly things like this rule stifling creative thinking more than promoting it.

      When it becomes and issue, I agree. But if it never becomes a issue, most people ignore it.

    3. Re:Grad school employees and professors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Salary does not mean clockless.

      You get paid a salary for X hours work per week. It isn't just "Salary for 24/7 your time, oh but to be nice you only have to be here 9 - 5".

      Your salary is still *by the hour* it just isn't requiring a time-sheet; because the hours you work are predetermined. (and if you deviate from those hours + or - then you need to inform payroll so they don't under or over pay you).

      As a result of all this; if they own their productivity when they aren't at the defined hours (as per their contract - they are getting a salary for those "hours" after all) then they aren't being paid for all the hours they work. I am sure overtime would come into it also. They need to roughly double or triple their salaries to cover all the extra hours that their minds are "creating" (24 hours per day; 8 hours sleep; 8 hours work; 8 hours overtime). Or at the very least they need to be paid for the hours it takes to come up with the ideas the employer is claiming ownership of. Even if they do occur outside of work time.

      Even if they DO pay you extra for those hours; they can't pick and choose. What about all the hours you thought about work where you DIDN'T come up with something useful? They should be paying for every crap hour if they want to claim the valuable ones.

    4. Re:Grad school employees and professors by davidwr · · Score: 1

      Odd, the last "salary" job I had was was "you get paid $X per month" whether the month had 28 days or 31, whether I worked 160 hours or much, much longer.

      My trump card? I knew my boss knew I had the option to quit for greener pastures at any time, assuming I could find those mythical "greener pastures."

      --
      Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    5. Re:Grad school employees and professors by ewibble · · Score: 2

      Salaried employees do have a clock to be off of, they have expected hours to work, yes occasionally they can be asked to work longer for no extra pay, but it does not give the employer the right to call on them 24/7, unless I was on call (and paid more because of it). If my employer rang me up at midnight and said I had to come in for free, because I was still on the clock, I would not so politely tell them where to go.

      In a salary there is give and take and works fine if both employer and employee are reasonable. But the moment I leave work I consider I myself off the clock. Otherwise I could stay home all week, do nothing and then say I worked an 168 hour week, I was never off the clock, right.

      Also I don't think I would be making minimum wage, I better go an complain.

    6. Re:Grad school employees and professors by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      If my employer rang me up at midnight and said I had to come in for free, because I was still on the clock, I would not so politely tell them where to go.

      If your employer calls you up and asks you to come in a midnight, and you do, you aren't getting paid any more than if you didn't. You don't get overtime. Your boss MAY let you take a day off, but there's no "time and a half". You telling him "where to go" will come up in your next performance review tied to any salary increase or contract renewals.

      Otherwise I could stay home all week, do nothing and then say I worked an 168 hour week, I was never off the clock, right.

      Some people do stay home for work. Telecommuting. You could certainly claim to have worked for 168 hours per week, but then as your boss I'd say you were the least productive employee I had and would be first on the list to be let go. It's your choice.

      The point is that as a salaried employee, if you CHOOSE to do things for work, then those things belong to work. If you're doing something that is part of your job, or is done because you are being paid to do it, then it is part of your work and there is a very good argument that any IP rights belong to the people who pay you. As a salaried employee, you aren't paid for forty hours per week, you are paid a salary. That time you thought you were "off the clock"? Well, you paid a salary for that time, too.

    7. Re:Grad school employees and professors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No I wasn't. I was paid a salary for the work that I did for the company. Whether it took me 160 hours, 80 hours, or 240 hours is of no material consequence because the salary only puts me on retainer to perform certain duties to the company at any time. What it doesn't do is give you leave to say that everything I do is done for the company. Only the things that you have asked me to do by communicating my job duties are things that you are paying me for. Everything else is my own work on my own time.

      What I'm saying is that I'm not "on the clock" by being paid a salary. There is no clock. You simply lay out some goals for me and pay me a set amount per month or per year to accomplish those goals. It doesn't matter when I work, or what I do as long as those goals are being met.

      The fact that most salaried employees hold an office and keep regular hours is of no consequence to what the salary means.

    8. Re:Grad school employees and professors by penix1 · · Score: 1

      It is a moot point in my state at least since teachers aren't salaried. So this whole salaried vs non-salaried argument is not going to be an issue in my state should they follow suit.

      Nobody has answered the main thrust of my post though...

      Where is the incentive to come up with new ideas and material when those ideas and material are going to be taken from you without compensation above what you would have gotten anyway? That is a question that remains whether the person is salaried or not.

      --
      This is a sig. This is only a sig. Had this been an actual sig you would have been informed where to tune for more sigs.
    9. Re:Grad school employees and professors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sucks to be you, then.

      Because they salary you for X hours a week. You don't get compensated for overtime, but you are protected from being forced to work overtime.

      You, however, prefer to bend over.

      Sucks to be you.

  13. Wrong! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A giant step backward for education in America! America is quickly becoming fascist!

    1. Re:Wrong! by pwizard2 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      What do you mean by "becoming"? This country has been fascist to the hilt for a long time now. Bullshit like Citizens United was just the icing on the cake.

      --
      "It is a denial of justice not to stretch out a helping hand to the fallen; that is the common right of humanity."
  14. It's not a typo by davidwr · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's the results of his creative efforts.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  15. Um, I don't think so by roc97007 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    > could mean that a picture drawn by a first-grader, a lesson plan developed by a teacher or an app created by a teen would belong to the school system, not the individual

    So, my daughter went to an art magnet school. During that time she created many works of art, some of which she entered into contests and won awards. She has commercial plans for a series of cartoon characters she invented while in school. If the school claimed ownership, she would not hesitate to sue, and she'd have a lot of company. Content creators can get really sticky about their own content, even as teenagers.

    Therefore, I don't think the part about the school copyrighting content created by the students is going to fly. All they'd need is a couple of high profile losses, and we'd skip immediately to step 4, punishment of the innocent.

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    1. Re:Um, I don't think so by s0nicfreak · · Score: 1

      It isn't as if they'd just suddenly start claiming copyright. They'd tell all students to have their parents sign something giving them copyright, or leave the school.

    2. Re:Um, I don't think so by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is the form I am "required" to sign for my elementary-age kids in Cambridge, MA:

      http://www3.cpsd.us/media/theme/Pro-Cambridge/network/10516/media/CPS%20Redesign/documents/For%20Parents/ReqdStuForms_2012-13.pdf?rev=0

      See page 5 for the "media release form." It's not clear what happens if I don't sign, which I never do.

    3. Re:Um, I don't think so by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      It isn't as if they'd just suddenly start claiming copyright. They'd tell all students to have their parents sign something giving them copyright, or leave the school.

      Nod. So if half the parents refuse to sign, and it becomes a media circus, then what? This is not refusing to be vaccinated, this is refusing to allow your children to be a free content source for the school. If leave the school is the choice, then homeschooling is always an option.

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    4. Re:Um, I don't think so by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should read the fine print of the contests. In a recent contest held by my local county for kids, the county would own the rights to all works submitted.

    5. Re:Um, I don't think so by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      You should read the fine print of the contests. In a recent contest held by my local county for kids, the county would own the rights to all works submitted.

      We do, (I'm a photographer, and participate also) and have not run into that provision yet. We would not participate in any contest that supplies free content to the providers. Why would any artist give away the rights to their own works simply to enter a contest?

      Now, select rights, like the right to photograph the winning works and feature them in a flyer, that seems reasonable. But exclusive rights to content created by others? Not bloody likely.

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    6. Re:Um, I don't think so by s0nicfreak · · Score: 1

      The only places half the parents would be private schools. While at public schools a few will refuse to sign, it won't be half (because a lot of public school parents won't care, some will just think "I'll sign anything if it means I keep getting free babysitting," and a lot will not even realize that refusing is a choice because they have been taught that you must just do whatever the school says) and the number of parents in all schools willing to sign will greatly outnumber the number of parents refusing.

      You think the media is going to speak out AGAINST something schools want to do? It will be spun as something that is done to "protect the children" - just like refusing to allow parents access to their children, arresting parents for bringing their kids to school late, and the number of other ways schools have overstepped their bounds. The media will make the people that refuse to sign will out to be crazies and/or degenerates, just as they do with the people that refuse ti vaccinate, the people that don't support armed guards in schools, the people that speak out against recess being done away with, etc. etc. etc.

  16. Classic MBA Crap by EmperorOfCanada · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Some MBA heard that x% of employees are earning a few dollars on the side and they realized that this could plug some budget holes (holes created by administration taking trips to Hawaii to learn the latest in ed-tech).

    But in classic MBA style they forget about incentive where if they take that money then the work won't be done. I suspect that again in classic MBA style that they need to "centralize" and "quality control" information leaving the system.

    This probably all stems from a requirement from some way overpriced anti-plagiarism software; even worse the pitch from said salesman might have documented (with great pie charts) that by doing this money grab the anti-plagiarism software would effectively be free.

    Lastly by claiming copyright they get better control over information that makes them look bad. So if some student makes a video of a drunk teacher and puts it on youtube then the school system will demand that youtube take it down on the grounds that they have copyright. I would love to see them trying to apply this to teachers with blogs, twitter accounts, and writing op-ed pieces for the local newspaper. These fools forget that there are a zillion places to put a drunk teacher video that will oddly enough defend the students' first amendment rights.

    To me this is just another great lesson for the kids that they learn that the educational system exists not one spec for them but entirely for the administration. In Ontario, Canada the school board got completely screwed by the government (before they screwed the government) so now like petulant children they are trying to keep the teachers from extra-curricular activities. They are now arguing that holding back these services won't harm the children. Whoa, wait a sec. Losers.

    1. Re:Classic MBA Crap by hedwards · · Score: 1

      They wouldn't have ownership of the video of the drunk teachers. Unless that happened during class, it would be a leap too far to take that anything the students do during the time they are still in school belongs to the school. At best they could claim ownership for materials created in or for school, and that's likely a stretch.

    2. Re:Classic MBA Crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      While I hate to interrupt your MBA-hate fest, I have spent quite a bit of time around a public school system, and I can tell you that business-like thinking of any kind, much less MBA-level thinking, is nowhere to be found in upper administration.

      Replace MBA with EdD however, and you might be on to something...

    3. Re:Classic MBA Crap by HornWumpus · · Score: 2

      I remember smoking a joint in the car on the way to high school, pulled up to a red light and there was our math teacher smoking a joint. We honked. Nobody snitched.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    4. Re:Classic MBA Crap by dwye · · Score: 2

      Replace MBA with EdD however, and you might be on to something...

      This "idea" was generated by the school board. While it is unlikely, there might be an MBA or a lawyer on the board; there is almost no chance that any school board member has an education degree. Most probably, one of the board members had this at their place of employment and decided that it made sense for the district. There are arguments in favor of the idea, but then even the Dred Scott decision had legal arguments in its favor.

    5. Re:Classic MBA Crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like, wow, it like, had NO effect on your ability to ... what were we talking about?

    6. Re:Classic MBA Crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What an incredible amount of straw you must have gathered to construct that man.

    7. Re:Classic MBA Crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So... do you have a conspiracy letter I can subscribe to? I could use more of your insane paranoid rants for a story I'm working on.

  17. Is there a union contract? by davidwr · · Score: 2

    If there's no union contract and no law to protect teachers' jobs, then the employer can simply say "by showing up for work after __REASONABLY_FAR_IN_THE_FUTURE_DATE__ you agree to __NEW_CONDITIONS_OF_EMPLOYMENT__.

    For most jobs, "reasonably far in the future date" for a change that hurts employees would be anywhere from 2 weeks to a few months for items that can wait, or immediately for health and safety issues, emergencies, and issues where the deadline is imposed from outside (e.g. a change in law), etc.

    For teachers, "reasonably far in the future" date is either the start of the next school year or, if it's late in this school year or late in the "job search season" for teachers who are planning to change employers, the following school year.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    1. Re:Is there a union contract? by Kjella · · Score: 1

      If there's no union contract and no law to protect teachers' jobs, then the employer can simply say "by showing up for work after __REASONABLY_FAR_IN_THE_FUTURE_DATE__ you agree to __NEW_CONDITIONS_OF_EMPLOYMENT__.

      For things actually in the work contract, I've never seen that happen without a signature agreeing to the new terms. What happens when it goes to court and you say "Please provide proof I agreed to or was even aware of these new terms." and they can't? Things that are only company policies though can change at any time, the work contract just contains the very basics.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    2. Re:Is there a union contract? by SecurityGuy · · Score: 1

      And the students? By showing up for school beyond such a date, you agree, but oh by the way, compulsory education. This thing doesn't stand a snowball's chance in hell of being legal. Whoever is responsible for this should be thrown out on their ear and never hold a position higher than janitor.

    3. Re:Is there a union contract? by FunPika · · Score: 1

      My guess it would be at the beginning of the year "you and a parent must sign this or face consequences ranging from detention to expulsion". Basically how K-12 schools in my area get students to agree to school policies.

      --
      After years of not using a signature, I am going to make one to say the following: Fuck Beta
  18. Small problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Minors cannot enter into contracts.

  19. Explicitly Includes Work Done On Your Time by guttentag · · Score: 1

    "Works created by employees and/or students specifically for use by the Prince George’s County Public Schools or a specific school or department within PGCPS, are properties of the Board of Education even if created on the employee’s or student’s time and with the use of their materials."

    Just wow. Normally I would say if you live in PG county, now is the time to move. But the sad reality is that PG county is much poorer than neighboring Montgomery county... it's always been time to move out if you could. I was once robbed at gunpoint in PG county. The only reason the criminal was ever caught was because he made the mistake of trying the same crime in Montgomery county an hour later. The police there found over a dozen wallets and purses in the car from people he had robbed in PG county.

    1. Re:Explicitly Includes Work Done On Your Time by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Doesn't seem so bad. Just don't create anything specifically for the use of the school. That lesson plan? Nah, it's for my use, not the school's. Make up a poster for the school dance? Sorry, you'll need a signed waiver from the board before I'll start.

    2. Re:Explicitly Includes Work Done On Your Time by BitterOak · · Score: 1
      But read the quote in your own comment:

      "Works created by employees and/or students specifically for use by the Prince George’s County Public Schools or a specific school or department within PGCPS, are properties of the Board of Education even if created on the employee’s or student’s time and with the use of their materials." [emphasis added]

      So this covers only assignments for school, not personal stuff you create at home for other purposes, such as that novel you've been writing. (Unless you turn in chapters of that novel for creative writing assignments!)

      --
      If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
    3. Re:Explicitly Includes Work Done On Your Time by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      Don't worry. South MoCo is turning into a shithole as well. If I didn't love my leisurely 10 minute commute, I'd be outta here as well.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  20. Read the article, summary leaves out stuff by davidwr · · Score: 0

    I wish I'd read the WHOLE article before I posted my earlier comments.

    The school system isn't TRYING to take the copyrights on everything, and they know they need to do a re-write.

    After reading the WHOLE article, I support their intent and, with respect to teachers' work-related stuff, their actions.

    It will be interesting to see what the final draft of this will say.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  21. Teachers by wisnoskij · · Score: 0

    It only makes sense to me that the school system would own any lesson plans and tests created by their employees.

    --
    Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    1. Re:Teachers by Daniel_Staal · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It sounds like it does, on the surface, but lesson plans are something teachers currently trade, sell, and use as a basic resource. The difference between a just-graduated teacher and a teacher with ten years of experience is that the teacher with experience has a stack of lesson plans, and can swap out which ones they use on any given day based on the progress, skill, and mood of their students. And, let's not forget, all of this is being created in the teacher's own time, outside of school hours.

      Oh, and I doubt the school district will be making these available for free to their own teachers. (Unlike the teachers themselves, who might share with a co-worker.)

      Any teacher who's spent any amount of time working on their own lesson plans would immediately start looking for a job outside the county. Any teacher who's any good wouldn't take a job in that county. You'll have beginner teachers who don't know any better, or teachers who've been there for ages and don't want to move, who'll just be hanging out until retirement. (And not updating any of their lesson plans.) Oh, and teachers who buy all of their lesson plans, because they can't be bothered to come up with them themselves. And the beginners will probably leave as quick as possible.

      So you're trying for high-turnover, and chasing out any teacher who wants to invest their own time and effort into teaching the kids. Which means you'll get low-quality teaching, and low-quality schools.

      --
      'Sensible' is a curse word.
    2. Re:Teachers by wisnoskij · · Score: 0

      "And, let's not forget, all of this is being created in the teacher's own time, outside of school hours." Yes teachers spend lots of time after hours working, but they do have lots of scheduled time to design tests and lesson plans as well.
      And since teachers are paid salaries, and not an hourly rate, they do not really have off hours. They are paid X dollars to do a job over a school semester, not 11 dollars an hour over 9-5.

      Also, say a teacher quits the day before the final. There is absolutely no time for a temp to make up a final test, the teacher who left was paid to create one. The school owns that test that he spent time creating prior to his leaving, and they should not have to buy it from him.

      "The difference between a just-graduated teacher and a teacher with ten years of experience is that the teacher with experience has a stack of lesson plans" And salary and seniority and experience.

      --
      Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    3. Re:Teachers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's fine - all the school needs is a guaranteed license to use the teacher's work (either limited or perpetual). No need to take copyright ownership!

    4. Re:Teachers by KillDaBOB · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yes teachers spend lots of time after hours working, but they do have lots of scheduled time to design tests and lesson plans as well.

      I don't know what it was like when you went to school, but in the high school I went to the teachers didn't have much scheduled time to work on such things. You got a half day every couple of months. You got one "free" period most days, but not every day, which was pretty much your lunch break. What scheduled time do you speak of? Both of my parents were teachers. You know what those half days consisted of? Mostly meetings. Again, not much scheduled time to work on lesson plans and the such. Teachers worked on all that stuff at home. Scheduled time my pink behind...

    5. Re:Teachers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&ie=UTF-8#hl=en&sugexp=les%3B&gs_rn=2&gs_ri=hp&tok=1KeYVWDUQjj_aOv7tI934w&cp=20&gs_id=h&xhr=t&q=teacher+lesson+plans&es_nrs=true&pf=p&safe=off&tbo=d&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&oq=teacher+lesson+plans&gs_l=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.r_qf.&bvm=bv.41867550,d.dmQ&fp=10c21c28c454948f&biw=1920&bih=955&ion=1

      Yeah because thousands of lesson plans aren't freely available.

      The difference between the 10 year teacher and the new teacher is the 10 year teacher has put up with the brats for 10 years already.

    6. Re:Teachers by Jason+Levine · · Score: 2

      Same was true with my wife when she was teaching. In fact, any "free" period that wasn't filled with meetings was usually filled with giving extra help to kids who were encountering difficulties in the regular lessons.

      Oh and those wonderful "summers off" that teachers have? They aren't lounging around doing nothing. They're coming up with lessons for the next year.

      I agree with Daniel_Staal. This will lead to a) good, experienced teachers fleeing before they are forced to start from scratch and not take their lesson plans with them, b) inexperienced teachers being trapped into the job they have (and thus getting bitter, ceasing to care, and becoming bad teachers), and c) quality of education declining. Hey, but at least the school board can bring in some additional cash by suing over any lesson plan remotely similar to the ones they own RIAA-style, right?

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    7. Re:Teachers by guy5000 · · Score: 1

      In my school district High School Teachers work 6 out of 9 periods. One period for lunch and two "prep periods". For elementary school teachers they have breaks for when the students are in lunch recess and music/gym etc.

  22. Legalized robbery by niiler · · Score: 1

    At my university, this is already the policy, more or less. If you develop software and release it GPL, they'll let you be. But otherwise, they own everything you produce. This is also true for most companies. Interestingly, if a history prof writes a book, he gets to keep all the profit. But if you as an engineer or programmer develop something and try to sell it without the university, even if done on your own time, the university will claim a conflict of interest and claim ownership. Many corporations do this as well. In some cases this may have some merit in that you have additional resources that you wouldn't otherwise have, and therefore couldn't have done this without corporate help. But in many cases the individual truly is developing this on their own - and the corporate entity still claims it. My thinking is that if corporations want to raid the fruits of their employees' off hours activity, they ought to be forced to take it to court. Of course, the only way this can be fair is if the corporation pays the entire court cost including that of the employee (will never happen). Likewise, the employee should have taken pains to demonstrate that their product was produced independent of corporate resources. Finally, if the employee wins, he keeps his job, keeps his invention, and keeps his money (having no court costs).

    Sorry if I'm a bit discombobulated... I keep restarting my typing due to a certain two year old...

    1. Re:Legalized robbery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's true for employees, because your employer is paying you to make those works. And when you're salaried, there's no difference between "on the clock" and "off the clock". It's not true for students because they are paying for the use of school facilities. The school has no claim over any student-created works.

    2. Re:Legalized robbery by KillDaBOB · · Score: 1

      That's true for employees, because your employer is paying you to make those works. And when you're salaried, there's no difference between "on the clock" and "off the clock".

      Say you're a carpenter. You go home after work, go to your garage, and make a cabinet. You made this cabinet with your tools and your time. Say you sell that cabinet. Are you required to give your employer the money you made on that cabinet? Hell no.

      This is why I never understood the whole tech sector employer thing of "anything YOU make is OURS."

    3. Re:Legalized robbery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What university? Let us know so we can all avoid it / burn it to the ground.

    4. Re:Legalized robbery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This was true at my university also. In order to be accepted into the engineering college you had to sign such a waiver. They said it was because of the research work done by assistants, but it applied to all work in their labs or not because you might carry away something you saw there. Don't like these terms? Don't go there is their answer.

  23. Much closer to theft? by davidwr · · Score: 1

    My first thought was "yeah, Maryland *IS* close to Washington, D.C."

    Cue rimshot.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  24. Quality Entertainment for Europe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I used to facepalm when reading this kind of reports.

    Now I simply pity those that put up with that kind of crap and laugh at their expense.
    Its so bad that its funny again. Especially since its always something new and unexpected.

    Take care not to end up in prison over a contract violation when unlocking your smart phone, my friends.

    1. Re:Quality Entertainment for Europe by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

      On the contrary, It's that darn Prince George who's to blame! Prince George was named after King George III, a European I might add...

  25. Make it hard for them by snspdaarf · · Score: 3, Interesting

    1. Form an LLC
    2. Acting as your child's agent, put them under contract with the LLC for their creative works until their 18th birthday, with an option for the child to retrieve all their rights from the LLC at that time.
    3. ???
    4. Screw the school district!

    --
    Why, without your clothes, you're naked, Miss Dudley!
    1. Re:Make it hard for them by DirtyLiar · · Score: 1

      No, no.

      #3 ???
      #4 Profit!

      --

      THINK! It's patriotic

  26. Greedy Bastardism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Certainly we live in an age of greedy bastardism. Disney going after stores that create images on cakes that bear some resemblance to a Disney character. Then submarine patents, copyright that extends on to infinity, employers declaring that all that their employees create belongs to the employer (whether done on company property or not), and now schools demanding that anything a student of a school or a teacher of a school creates (whether on company property or not) belongs to the company. I'm quite tired of it all. If companies are persons, then they have to learn to share with other persons. There should be not greedy "mine mine mine" here. Here's an idea. What the company creates, the company keeps. What the employee creates the employee keeps. What the employee brings to the company (both body and ideas) can be used by the company for the time that the employee is retained by the company. When the employee leaves, so does their works. If the employee is paid by the company during the process of creation, then for the amount of time the employee was compensated, the company can use the work, after the employee is gone. Then the work reverts back to the employee. Example: a company employs an employee for 10 years to create something. The employee is compensated during the entire time. After the employee is no longer working for the company, the company can use the ideas created by the employee for 10 years (then must stop). Ideas should only be copyrightable for 20 years, so anything already in the public domain can't be re-copyrighted, and are fair use by either employee or employer.

  27. On the bright side... by Livius · · Score: 1

    They are at least thinking about the issue before there are lawsuits.

    Hopefully they will think a little more and come up with something less outrageous. My university's policy was that the student owned the copyright but the university acquired a royalty-free licence for its own use.

  28. Dropouts by Mark+Rawls · · Score: 1

    I imagine that this will incite a slew of creative and intelligent students dropping out of school. I certainly wouldn't put up with having my school suddenly flipping the switch and saying that everything I do belongs to them. As a musician and web designer, that would be an instant deal breaker - I would seek home education immediately, or go with one of the many more reasonable options online (such as Florida Virtual School).

    1. Re:Dropouts by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      I imagine that this will incite a slew of creative and intelligent students dropping out of school.

      I believe both of the students in PG County who meet the criteria of 'creative and intelligent' are already out of PGCPS.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  29. Copyright assignment == contract by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Copyright assignment is a contract; minors cannot enter contracts. This is unenforceable and absurd.

  30. Private school maybe, public no way by luckymutt · · Score: 1

    If it was a private school doing this I could see they might have a chance of an argument. As a public school system, tax payer funded, doing this it is complete crap. Isn't there something in the u US about government agencies not holding copyrights anyway? Or is that just on the federal level? Or am I completely mistaken on this point?

    1. Re:Private school maybe, public no way by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 1

      3.1.3 Does 17 USC Â10560 apply to works of State and Local Governments?

      No, it applies only to federal government works. State and local governments may and often do claim copyright in their publications. It is their prerogative to set policies that may allow, require, restrict or prohibit claim of copyright on some or all works produced by their government units.

    2. Re:Private school maybe, public no way by luckymutt · · Score: 1

      Ah...thanks for the clarification.
      PG County's proposal is still BS. At least for the student's work.
      Teachers, as employees, may well need to sign off on such things as terms of employment. I don't know. But it's an employer/employee relationship.
      That does not exist with the student, who is compelled to attend...see other posts for other reasons

    3. Re:Private school maybe, public no way by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 1

      I agree with you. You can't just impose such a thing without some sort of quid pro quo.

      From the articles it's looking like they are starting to realize this as well.

    4. Re:Private school maybe, public no way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Works produced by a federal employee in the course of their duties are public domain.
      Works produced by The Government (certainly for federal, not sure about state or local) are public domain.
      The government can own copyrights if they are transferred to it.

    5. Re:Private school maybe, public no way by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

      Almost every single taxpayer-funded public university in the entire country claims IP ownership of everything the students do that is accomplished using any campus resources, including dorms, computers, networks, telephone systems, libraries, professors, and other students.

      In fact, at my alma mater, a waiver of rights and assignment of intellectual property contract is included IN THE APPLICATION for admission. By simply applying, you are agreeing to assign to them all creative works and inventions you might dream up from the date you matriculate until the date you graduate.

  31. To quote Spock by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

    "I believe my response would be go to Hell. "

    You can't just be angry at the messages coming out of this crazy factory. You have to be angry at institutional structures encouraging the lunacy coming out of these boards on a seemingly daily basis.

    1. Re:To quote Spock by zm · · Score: 3, Funny

      I'd rather quote Arkell v. Pressdram.

      --
      Sig ?
  32. Yet another example by MitchDev · · Score: 1

    of the need to repeal copyright

    1. Re:Yet another example by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      You might want to flesh out how, exactly, you got from A to B there. If anything, abolishing copyright would make it easier for the school board to steal their students work.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    2. Re:Yet another example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You might want to flesh out how, exactly, you got from A to B there. If anything, abolishing copyright would make it easier for the school board to steal their students work.

      how can you steal something if it is free?

  33. Not without compensation by RichMan · · Score: 1

    They can't take copyright without compensation. It would mean renegotiating the contracts for teachers.

    If they want the copyright on my kids work, that will $1000 a page. The kid is a creative genius.
    I will supply the crayons the paper. If they are willing to pay.

  34. copyright is usual controlled by who paid for it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You pay the teacher, so you have some rights to the work. however the student pays you. so the student has rights to their own works. It's a rather simple equation.

  35. Um... by WillyWanker · · Score: 1

    No. Sorry. You cannot copyright that which you a.) don't create, and b.) don't pay for. Sorry. but students are not your employees, nor are they work-for-hire unless you decide to start paying them for coming to school.

    How much you wanna bet a Republicant was behind this brain-dead idea?

    1. Re:Um... by iwaybandit · · Score: 1

      If we're talking about Prince George's County in Maryland, I'll bet against. The board appears to be elected on a non-partisan basis. Take a look.

    2. Re:Um... by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 1

      Not very much. Maryland is a very blue state.

    3. Re:Um... by WillyWanker · · Score: 1

      Actually after a bit more reading it turns out they came up with this brilliant idea after attending an Apple seminar about how to monetize the things teachers create using school-owned iCrap devices.

      So no, not Republicants. Worse. Apple.

  36. Contracting with minors ? by Turminder+Xuss · · Score: 1

    In Australia generally speaking a literary, dramatic, artistic or musical work made pursuant to terms of employment belongs to the employer. That position can be modified by agreement, but in the absence of agreement if you get paid a salary for doing it, it belongs to the boss. If you're not an employee then it belongs to the author, again subject to modification by agreement. Things like sound recordings or films are different, copyright in those would belong to the person who owns the equipment on which they were created. That could be the school. A contract with a child to assign copyright may well not be enforceable. A private school might include an indemnity by parents in favour of the school in their contract with the parents. A public school couldn't insist on it. In either case if a school board, without any contractual mechanism, simply declared that they owned copyright in students literary works it would have much the same legal effect as if they had declared they owned Manhattan with an option on Rhode Island.

    --
    You seem to regard science as some kind of dodge... or hustle.
  37. What about sports? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If a basketball or football coach creates a play-book in their time as the coach, does the school now own that play-book?

  38. Unintended Consquence by www.sorehands.com · · Score: 1

    If work done by a teacher at home because property of the school, then that work would become work for the school Then, any injury at home tangentially related to the work would become a work related injury.

    1. Re:Unintended Consquence by AbrasiveCat · · Score: 1

      If work done by a teacher at home because property of the school, then that work would become work for the school Then, any injury at home tangentially related to the work would become a work related injury.

      Ha, and the students? I can see it, 1st graders with workers comp claims.

  39. It's a half-measure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why not just take an another step and claim copyright on all work done by a student in their life?

    After all, they did it using the education they got in a school.
    It is inherently unfair to rob the Board of Education of fruits of their labor.

  40. Expensive Legal Fees by pubwvj · · Score: 1

    The school board is going to be faced with very expensive legal fees and lose. This will get challenged and their claim to ownership of student works will be thrown out. Hopefully the school board will be forced to pay the legal fees of the kids and a class action lawsuit will be brought against the school board heaping on more costs so that nobody else tries this. Copyright law is pretty clear that the creator of the work is the copyright owner unless explicitly otherwise agreed. Students are minors and can't agree to this.

  41. from a former student by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FUCK YOU
    i do something neat and unique for homework and get a good grade YOU SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO STEAL IT

    all this does is make you do as little as possible now to get buy
    great now students will be as bad as hollywood and in no time at all america will be a land where you can immigrate ONLY if your a retard

    1. Re:from a former student by PPH · · Score: 1

      Preparing children for the corporate world.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    2. Re:from a former student by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're a former student? You don't seem to have learned spelling or grammar. Or use of caps, while we're at it.

  42. Re:Yeah, fuck off.part 2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and if i sue you cause its there without expressed written permission?
    it will go away fast.

  43. Linux? by archer,+the · · Score: 1

    So, what would've happened if this was a policy at the University of Helsinki, in 1991?

    1. Re:Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FreeBSD might have probably become the dominant Free Unix-based OS on IBM-compatible PCs, and GNU Hurd might have gotten much more traction than it has today. The BSDs operated under the cloud of a lawsuit from Unix System Labs until 1995, which was long enough for Linux to become dominant. Work on the Hurd is anemic these days largely because of Linux, of which even Richard Stallman says that "finishing it is not crucial".

    2. Re:Linux? by Dwedit · · Score: 1

      If it was still released under the GPL, then it wouldn't matter who owned the copyright on it.

    3. Re:Linux? by dwye · · Score: 2

      So, what would've happened if this was a policy at the University of Helsinki, in 1991?

      If it was still released under the GPL, then it wouldn't matter who owned the copyright on it.

      But if U. of H. owned the copyright, Linus releasing software under the GPL would be illegal (without the University's prior approval) because he would be releasing a work that he did not own, like a film editor releasing a version of a movie before the studios which produced it could.

  44. during their own time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Good luck with that one. Of course if a teacher sues, the school will find a way to get rid of them as "punishment" for breaking rank. in the case of a student, they are a minor, so good luck with that one too.

    it has fail written all over it.

  45. Look at who's on the board by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Prince George County's Board of Eduction page: http://www1.pgcps.org/board/

    Six black women. Two white women. One black man.

    Now stop all those horrible thoughts popping up in your head, dear reader, and vote me down. Reality will still be there, though.

  46. Yeah, it's not unusual.... by mark-t · · Score: 1

    It's not unusual for a company to hold the rights to an employee's work...

    This is true... but the company is actually *PAYING* the employee.

    Last time I checked, you have to pay to go to school.

  47. Corporate States of America by ks*nut · · Score: 1

    Just one more step in the downfall of what used to be our country.

  48. Mostly makes sense - outside the USA by Captain+Sensible · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Teaching is a collegial activity, so a good lesson plan would normally be shared within a staff room. Student's work is produced by minors where the school is 'in loco parentis' so their work would become school property to protect them from exploitation by adults, plagiarists and commercial interests.

    That's how it works in Australia. Public school teachers are state employees so all their work is the property of the Crown. Good teaching material can be (and is) distibuted to other publis schools to give system-wide improvement. A teacher who gains a reputation for producing good stuff can negotiate this into promotion or a consultancy. State employees are not supposed to produce any paid work outside their job but in practice teachers who work as tutors, coaches or musicians etc are not imposed upon by the government as there is a tacit acknowledgement that teachers often need another income. Private school teachers' work is the property of their employee (diocesan office, school board) for much the same reason.

    School administrators (puiblic or private) have a legal 'duty of care' to children. They won't stop parents from taking their kids to modeling agencies or auditions but if they produce something in school, say their major artwork for the matriculation exam, the school can arrange a professional exhibition and prevent students from beign ripped off.

    American libertarians will doubt that government agencies can be benign (and if you want gold medal bastardry only a government can provide it) but not all countries have vast armies, huge spy agencies, heavily armed police or kill people with robot aircraft. The Department of Education will be staffed at policy and implementation level by people who believe in the value of education and teachers actually like children!

    1. Re:Mostly makes sense - outside the USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good Lord. I'm a teacher in the U.S., and my district tried to pull the copyright issue with teachers. I responded that I have no problem with the district claiming copyright over specific works that they assign to me. For example, if they assign me to develop a curriculum plan for secondary science courses, that is of course theirs. HOWEVER, I do not accept any district copyright claim over work created by me as a professional teacher other than those works mentioned above.

      My journal articles are mine, my lesson plans are mine, my projects and works are mine and mine alone.

    2. Re:Mostly makes sense - outside the USA by mdielmann · · Score: 1

      Student's work is produced by minors where the school is 'in loco parentis' so their work would become school property to protect them from exploitation by adults, plagiarists and commercial interests.

      School administrators (puiblic or private) have a legal 'duty of care' to children. They won't stop parents from taking their kids to modeling agencies or auditions but if they produce something in school, say their major artwork for the matriculation exam, the school can arrange a professional exhibition and prevent students from beign ripped off.

      So, why on earth would this be property of the school, and not property of the student, or at most held in trust for the student? How does assigning the property right to another entity protect the rights of the child? It just sounds like they can get screwed over by the school board rather than by their parents, where at least presumably they would enjoy some of the benefits of the increased income to the household.

      --
      Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
    3. Re:Mostly makes sense - outside the USA by strack · · Score: 1

      one would think any profits made off the back off a childs labor and art would fall under some sort of 'shirley temple' law, wherein the money made is held in trust until the child turns 18 and can take ownership of it.

    4. Re:Mostly makes sense - outside the USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't be ashamed, I'm sure you'll catch up soon! You'll have corporate-sponsored drones watching kindergarteners for IP violations in no time! :-)

    5. Re:Mostly makes sense - outside the USA by usuallylost · · Score: 1

      The Department of Education will be staffed at policy and implementation level by people who believe in the value of education and teachers actually like children!

      Yeah, maybe in Australia that is the case. In the US the Department of education doesn't really educate kids. Actually running schools, hiring teacher etc is actually a state and local responsibly. The Department of Education gathers statistics about education, gives grants for various things, advocates for educational change, regulates schools and enforces civil rights laws in the areas of education. There have been a lot of complaints over the last few decades that the department is actually an impediment to good education. Basically because it forces schools to spend a large amount of time and money complying with its various regulations. Most of which have little do with education and a lot to do with politics.

    6. Re:Mostly makes sense - outside the USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      American libertarians will doubt that government agencies can be benign

      I don't know if this is a deliberate straw man argument (or trolling) or not, but I'll bite.

      American libertarians do not doubt that governments can be benign. However, they do recognize that governments can also be invasive, overbearing, and at times even tyrannical. It's this second point where Libertarians are concerned. Perhaps because they are concerned about avoiding the downside you've been fooled into thinking they don't see the upside.

    7. Re:Mostly makes sense - outside the USA by johnwallace123 · · Score: 1

      School administrators (puiblic or private) have a legal 'duty of care' to children. They won't stop parents from taking their kids to modeling agencies or auditions but if they produce something in school, say their major artwork for the matriculation exam, the school can arrange a professional exhibition and prevent students from beign ripped off.

      And who is there to prevent the administrators from ripping off the children? After all, since they own the copyright, it's theirs to sell, and of course, we know that kids make stupid decisions with money, so the school will just keep that money and spend it "wisely" (those conferences in Hawaii don't grow on trees!). Better than the kid wasting it on candy or something, right?

      It seems like everyone wants a cheap, easy buck off of someone else's work now. What ever happened to earning a living through an honest day's work?

  49. Knowledge takes many forms. by englishstudent · · Score: 1

    It's not all about academics. Schools provide opportunities to develop and hone social skills, to forge friendships and to discover new interests. Home schooled students need to be involved in these things (granted this is quite possible). I don't quite understand the problem of standardized tests. If you don't have a standardized test, how will you compare the students? The test should be a guideline as to what is considered common knowledge for students of a particular schooling level. Take it with a grain of salt.

    --
    We'll never make it.......oh! we made it! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SWf3iJjqYCM&list=FL7kKrE4eTs17mQl7eyvJIOg
    1. Re:Knowledge takes many forms. by s0nicfreak · · Score: 1

      Personally my main issues with standardized tests are: Standardized tests only measure how well the student has memorized the answers to the standardized test. It isn't necessary to compare students to other students when you are highly involved, with lots of one-on-one time, because you can tell the student is learning (or not learning) rather than just if they are memorizing as much as other students.

    2. Re:Knowledge takes many forms. by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Schools provide opportunities to develop and hone social skills, to forge friendships and to discover new interests.

      Right. The only way to make friends is to be locked inside a building with others your own age. No adults have friends that they met outside of work/school. Not to mention that for some people, this isn't even necessary or wanted.

      But you know what else most schools seem to provide? An awful education.

      I don't quite understand the problem of standardized tests.

      Then chances are you don't understand the problem with the public school system. That is, it doesn't teach understanding. All it does is have kids memorize material without understanding any of it just so they can perhaps do better on a standardized test. However, again, these tests don't measure understanding, only rote memorization. You can memorize all the math equations and procedures that you want, but that doesn't mean you understand any of them.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    3. Re:Knowledge takes many forms. by MacGyver2210 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If the kids you are referring to don't understand something, why not just ask "why" or "how"? Do they WANT to be ignorant?

      I went to public schools. I imagine my education would be about half as complete had I not bothered to question "why" or "how" to every new subject or piece of information. I had to PULL the information out of the teachers, because they were pretty unmotivated. Once I showed a teacher I was actively interested in something, they would begin to show me more and give seriously fun and interesting 'extra credit' work that the rest of the students didn't do(synchrotron experiments in Sophomore year anyone?)

      All of this came from my parents. They ENCOURAGED me to ask why. They would tell me some neat fact, like how fast the earth was going. When I asked "Why doesn't it just fly into space?" my parents explained to me (or at least tried their best) how gravity works, and in kiddie terms, basically laid out several of Newton's principles. THAT is how you answer a kid's question.

      For some reason I can't comprehend, parents are annoyed when their children ask "why" repeatedly. The kid is trying to naturally figure out how something works and why it ended up that way. Parents shut them up, or distract them with games or TV, and actively discourage them from truly understanding a topic. Louis C.K. even has a whole bit about this. THAT is the real problem with education today: parents are too lazy to help teach their kids, they don't give a shit, and just want the schools to 'do it for them'.

      'Murica

      --
      If the only way you can accept an assertion is by faith, then you are conceding that it can't be taken on its own merits
    4. Re:Knowledge takes many forms. by Belial6 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I was not arguing the pros or cons of homeschooling vs. public education. Just that standardized testing is not a legal requirement.

      That being said, public schools are TERRIBLE places for kids to try to hone social skills. The friends they forge are the ones assigned to them, and the opportunity to discover new interests are a fraction of what is available to home schooled kids. Public school socialization is about as good as public school education...not good.

      Standardized tests would be great if they were designed in a way that worked. The ones being used don't. I do give my kid the standardized tests. I don't report his grades to anyone, but I make sure that he ACTUALLY knows the information that is considered standard for a child a few years older than he is. Whereas his friends in public school generally don't understand the subjects they are passing the tests for.

      Standardized tests are the lie that people tell themselves when they want to convince themselves that the public school system is working.

    5. Re:Knowledge takes many forms. by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      ...chances are you don't understand the problem with the public school system. That is, it doesn't teach understanding. All it does is have kids memorize material without understanding any of it...

      So enlighten us.
      - How does one teach understanding?
      - How does one measure the progress of students?
      - How does one understand something without remebering it?

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    6. Re:Knowledge takes many forms. by Ambassador+Kosh · · Score: 1

      What I have seen is that even though I scored extremely well in standardized tests they do a very poor job of measuring skills.

      More and more the way we test people is becoming divorced from the reality that we live in.

      Mostly though standardized tests focus too much on memorization. Memorization is NOT learning it is just easy to test. You can be great at solving real problems but if you have a poor memory you will do badly on these exams while doing well in actual life problems.

      One nice thing about the FE exam is that it is not a memorization based exam. You are given a book with equations, tables etc.

      --
      Computer modeling for biotech drug manufacturing is HARD! :)
    7. Re:Knowledge takes many forms. by Ambassador+Kosh · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You can understand something without memorizing it. There are hundreds of equations involved in various ways of doing heat transfers. You don't have to remember them all to understand how to use them correctly. If you know your situation is laminar fluid flow through a pipe you can look up the appropriate equations. The important part is learning and understanding hows and whys of heat transfer.

      You can also measure the progress of students by giving them real problems to solve. Something that requires applying the knowledge they have gained. Most of my engineers classes have two hour exams with 4 problems and everything is open book, notes, calculator etc. You are given real problems to solve that are unlike problems you have done before. You have to figure out how to apply your knowledge to solve the problem. Memorization does not help you for squat on those exams. Understanding is the only thing that will help you on those exams.

      --
      Computer modeling for biotech drug manufacturing is HARD! :)
    8. Re:Knowledge takes many forms. by Loki_666 · · Score: 1

      You teach understanding through examples. Practical application (where possible).

      Measure progress? You do not test with standard tests which basically require memorization. You test by seeing how they can apply their understanding. This can be done via practical sessions (rather subjective, requires good teachers with a good understanding themselves and a critical eye). Or you make the tests more open and allow students research time and materials as part of the test. Its the ability to apply knowledge that counts in the real world. Of course, this means they can't automate scoring and it also requires impartial and intelligent assessors, and lots of time, so that's probably not an option unfortunately.

      There is a difference between remembering principles and knowing how to approach problems than memorizing facts.

    9. Re:Knowledge takes many forms. by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      OK, that was funny.

    10. Re:Knowledge takes many forms. by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      THAT is the real problem with education today:

      There is more than one problem. Parents contribute to the problem, but so do the schools.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    11. Re:Knowledge takes many forms. by Runaway1956 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      " Schools provide opportunities to develop and hone social skills, to forge friendships and to discover new interests."

      Using Chicago's schools as a prime example, I can see that is working quite well.

      Basically, schools are perfect indoctrination centers. Little children who create guns from Legos are expelled from school, until they learn that guns are evil. Zero tolerance for anyone who doesn't conform.

      The school systems are broken, plain and simple, They are broken due to government interference. Today's schools are no better than the little ten to fifty student schoolhouses that my parents and grandparents attended. People only BELIEVE that they are better, because government TELLS you that they are better.

      With all the resources available on the internet today, I daresay a kid can get a much better quality education at home, if only he desires to do so.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    12. Re:Knowledge takes many forms. by Runaway1956 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      - How does one teach understanding?

          Try teaching what the kid is interested in? Many children have demonstrated an interest in something, only to be hushed, because the class was busy with something else, something more important. Horticulture, animal husbandry, chemistry, even history. "Tommy, we don't have time to discuss the Battle of Waterloo, get your colored pencils out, and draw me another meaningless chart that no one really gives a damn about!)

      - How does one measure the progress of students?

          When the kid begins to stretch YOUR mind, when he asks CHALLENGING questions, when you discover that YOU ARE LEARNING, just to stay ahead of him, then there is no need to measure the kid's progress. And, I speak from experience, believe it or not. I'm not a teacher in any formal education setting. Uncle Sam did make me an "Educational Petty Officer" in the Navy. Teach, teach, tutor, teach. I've continued in civilian life, always teaching my subordinates. And, those students challenge me often enough. They force me to learn more, in an attempt to stay ahead of them.

      If your students never challenge your own knowledge and education, then you've done it all wrong.

      - How does one understand something without remebering it?

      You teach CONCEPTS, not facts and figures. One who learns concepts can solve any problem to which the concept might relate. One who memorizes facts, figures, dates, and names may or may not ever actually solve a problem. He might run into a problem that he sees as similar to a problem solved by Professor Numty in England, way back in 1860, but he probably can't remember how Professor Numty solved the problem. He never understood the formula or how to apply it. Instead, he wasted time memorizing the professor's name, his biography, and all the awards the professor earned. All meaningless BULLSHIT.

      The real irony in such a situation would be, that Professor Numty's theory and formula aren't even applicable, because or poor memorizing fool really doesn't understand ANYTHING about his current problem, OR Professor Numty's work!

      When some cute little kid looks up at you, and asks, "Why is the sky blue?" what answer do you offer? The kid has a burning desire to learn, to understand - do you waste the opportunity, or do you help the munchkin to understand his/her world better?

      Bottom line, for me, is "Fuck the beancounters. Education is to important to allow Washington to have a say in it!"

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    13. Re:Knowledge takes many forms. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >>Then chances are you don't understand the problem with the public school system. That is, it doesn't teach understanding. All it does is have kids memorize material without understanding any of it.

      Heck, there are even some school systems that don't teach people not to make sweeping generalizations without citing any data.

    14. Re:Knowledge takes many forms. by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      This is what I've generally found to be the case. I've lived in four states and have been around many public schools, went through public school myself, and have heard the same complaints from many other people who realize that understanding is not the same as rote memorization. Hell, just look at the standardized tests they hand out. Generally multiple choice garbage. Not to mention the No Child Left Behind act. Hard data? Perhaps not. Anecdotal? Maybe so. But I still believe that this is a huge problem.

      Maybe I could've been more careful with my wording and said that not all teachers/schools are like that, but my general point remains. I myself have a hard time believing that anyone who cares could look at the state of public education in the US and think, "This is how I want it to be." Yes, even without being directed to any studies. If they don't live in the US, though, then that's somewhat understandable.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    15. Re:Knowledge takes many forms. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Parents are annoyed when their children ask "why" repeatedly because they don't know the answer and are afraid to look stupid in front of their kids. Not many like mine, who either answered or said "I don't know." The "I don't knows" made me even more curious.

      There are probably more than a few like my sister, who, when my great nephew asked her how computers work, just shrugged and said "it's magic."

    16. Re:Knowledge takes many forms. by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      If the kids you are referring to don't understand something, why not just ask "why" or "how"? Do they WANT to be ignorant?

      Because after the first few dozen times of asking "why" or "how" and being told "you don't need to worry about that" from someone in a position of authority, they believe it, as they haven't developed the cynicism to question it.

      . Once I showed a teacher I was actively interested in something, they would begin to show me more and give seriously fun and interesting 'extra credit' work that the rest of the students didn't do(synchrotron experiments in Sophomore year anyone?)

      Then you got lucky. Even back when I was in elementary and high school, twenty-*mumble* years ago, it was more common for a "curious" student like that to be branded a troublemaker or a smart-ass, singled out for making the teachers' lives difficult, and having your life made difficult in return (extra make-work assignments for the whole class, 'thanks to Jimmy and Susie, who clearly don't have enough to do.').

      I agree, a good teacher can make a world of difference, and I had a couple which managed to be enough to overcome the parade of assholes, but, as I said, I was lucky in that.

    17. Re:Knowledge takes many forms. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I get your point, but as a kid I never vocally asked why. I thought asking was lazy. Instead I would pull out the encyclopedia, go to the library or get on the internet (ok more likely Compuserve or a BBS) and figure it out. As a parent that would be my only annoyance with why. I will explain it if asked, but I prefer when my kid takes the initiative and figures it out. I want my kids to ask pointed questions, not just why or how.

    18. Re:Knowledge takes many forms. by Rysc · · Score: 1

      How does one teach understanding?

      The answer to this is a philosophical one. We can say pretty definitively that rote memorization is a very poor method, but there is no generally accepted "best" method.

      How does one measure the progress of students?

      You don't. Progress is life; are they still alive? You can only encourage and hope, measurement is pointless.

      How does one understand something without remebering it?

      Easy. I understand lots of things that I can't remember if asked. Memorization is a very different thing than understanding.

      I'll try to contrive an example: I understand English, for example, and can use it with precise correctness (and with a vast vocabulary) upon request, but if you ask me to define parts of speech or diagram a sentence I'll fail 99% of the time. I tend to score quite poorly on English exams that are not purely prose. A lot of things are like that, although less so in the discrete sciences. Do you understand recursion? Good. Can you tell me what year it was invented and by whom? You fail the programming exam! This is the way testing fails.

      --
      I want my Cowboyneal
    19. Re:Knowledge takes many forms. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      TL;DR. But I have an answer to the question:

      When some cute little kid looks up at you, and asks, "Why is the sky blue?" what answer do you offer?

      There you go!

    20. Re:Knowledge takes many forms. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It sounds as if you would like the place I visited yesterday with a friend and her 8 year old twins: Nemo, a very playful science museum in Amsterdam. Near the entrance it starts as a wonderful playground for kids, I think it took us about an hour to get more than 20 meters into the museum. Every game demonstrates something fundamental. The kids I was with didn't seem to stop to wonder why things worked the way they did, they just enjoyed themselves. But they got in contact with the principles. If they ever notice a monitor or tv only uses red, green and blue light they may remember producing all kinds of colors, including white, by turning knobs on those 'disco lights'. If they ever wonder why their bicycle is so well-balanced they may remember holding a turning wheel by its axle while sitting on a turning chair and experiencing all kinds of weird forces. Hanging above our heads were signs with enough explanation for adults to answer basic questions. They also enjoyed spelling their names in binary using switches, and making drawings on a touch screen, seeing them being turned into 0's and 1's, transferred to another touch screen, where the 0's and 1's turned back into a drawing. Again they didn't ask questions, but the idea that what computers do at the lowest level is manipulating data in the form of 0's and 1's has been demonstrated to them (and to their mother). There is an exhibition about hormones and the teenage brain aimed at teenagers, they show some basic human psychology, biology, you can play with a water treatment installation and produce drinking water, touch a real 4.5 billion year old meteorite. Everything is interactive. It doesn't go very deep but it plants a lot of seeds, arouses curiosity and presents science not as something dry and boring but as loads of fun. Wonderful place. It attracts 0.5 million visitors per year in a country with a polulation of 16.7 million. Not bad.

    21. Re:Knowledge takes many forms. by yurtinus · · Score: 1

      Just to expand on this - standardized testing makes the class curriculum adapt to teach the test, plus takes a number of days away from teaching to administer the tests. Want to teach about some important history event or some mathematical method you taught last year? Too bad. It's not on the standardized test and you don't have the time to put it in there anymore.

      --
      +1 Disagree
  50. Simple solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The greedification of America continues.

    If I was a parent in PG county I would simply have a legal document drawn up that states since they are claiming ownership of all school (and non-school) work that from this point forward any and all school work is now going to be compensated according the rate set by state minimum wage laws (plus an additional dollar an hour for each successive grade level). Since the school system is claiming all things created outside of school time the students must therefore be paid 24/7. Then present a monthly bill.

    Once people start showing up at the next PTA meeting with these documents the school board will drop this stupidity like a hot potato.

    1. Re:Simple solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Great idea! Hold the payment in escrow to pay for their college tuition. Those just entering the system at the 1st grade might not have to work a day in their lives.

  51. As a resident of PG County ... by oneiros27 · · Score: 4, Informative

    I'm just thankful that we've made the news without any murders, theft, or corruption.

    I thought that we had gotten rid of the idiotic school board when they disbanded it in 2002 and got Marilyn Bland and the others out of there. (although, we haven't gotten rid of her yet)

    --
    Build it, and they will come^Hplain.
    1. Re:As a resident of PG County ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      uhhh.. this may not have murders, but it IS blatant theft of student and teacher intellectual property, and ripe with corrupt school district administrators.

    2. Re:As a resident of PG County ... by oneiros27 · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I don't consider IP issues 'theft', although in this case, I'm not sure, as you actually *are* denying the original owner from using what they had. And as none of the administration would directly profit from this proposal, I'm going to go with Hanlon's Razor on the corruption interpretation :

      Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity

      (product of PG county schooling for grades K, 1, 6-12 ... and I don't care what the MNCPPC folks argue, there's nothing wrong with calling it PG. It's not like Chuck county, where we're potentially using it as an insult. (Charles just sounds too formal ... there are way too many SMIBs there for it to be formal))

      --
      Build it, and they will come^Hplain.
  52. Solution is easy by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

    Copyright it yourself before you turn it in, then sue them for copyright infringement.

    1. Re:Solution is easy by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      You don't actually understand this stuff, do you?

      You don't have to "copyright" your creative works - you own the copyright automatically by the act of creating the work. Unless, of course, you're employed by the organization paying you to create it, in a classic "work for hire" situation. In which case your employer owns the work they paid you to create. Working as a contractor can change that, as can negotiating a different employment contract for a full time employee.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    2. Re:Solution is easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't actually understand satire, do you?

      Also, while you may "own" the copyright on your work the moment you create it, you can't do dick about it without registering it with the copyright office.

      And, if someone, like a school takes your work and registers the copyright themselves, it becomes far more difficult for you to exert your ownership, since it will no longer be you who is considered by the government to be the owner. You will have to first challenge the copyright, be successful, then re-file your own copyright, be successful, and then sue, since you cannot sue for copyright infringement unless you have the work registered in your name at the copyright office.

  53. Another reason my kid won't attend a PG school by bleh-of-the-huns · · Score: 2

    Among many others, including the fact that the teachers (not all, but many) are horrible, standardized testing, and well, the fact that PG county is a shitty area.

    --
    I came, I conquered, I coredumped
  54. what about the graffiti? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do they want to claim copyright to that as well?

  55. Takings clause issue by Animats · · Score: 1

    No, not student works. That's a 5th amendment "takings clause" issue. This is a public school, an agency of government. Public school students are not employees. Not even close. Any taking of student property must be compensated.

    I don't think any public school board has been dumb enough to try this before. State universities have been careful about this, after some troubles. (Private universities are a different case. They're not state actors.)

  56. Re:copyright is usual controlled by who paid for i by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "You pay the teacher, so you have some rights to the work."

          No they don't. The teacher was hired to teach, not create works. Teachers aren't paid well enough to compensate for their creativity like most creators. This is just a giant content grab so it becomes standard that what you create belongs to someone else. Pretty much schools are seeing teachers selling lesson plans and want in on the take. Unfortunately they don't have a right to it. Never mind teachers pay taxes too.

  57. Like Cheap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Greed is just like cheap. It has no bottom, no limit, and should never be tolerated. And this time the bill harms the young people. Not only do they want to steal the work of the young but a teacher who happens to create something special on his own time dare not share it with students. On top of that out already broken court system will be burdened with many more suits and the tax payers will bear the burden while lawyers get rich.
                      Stop this useless crap.

  58. Subjects appear to be required. Annoying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If they start to do this at my school, I will boycott creating any works.

  59. Not Lesson plans or normal student work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Most teachers in public school districts are required to turn in some or all of their lesson plans. The format these districts want is basically unusable in a "real" classroom (they know this and they know there's no money there), they grade mine on a rubric, believe it or not. I actually have two sets of lesson plans, one that I turn in to be graded and one I use. What the district is after are any apps, or things like that, the teacher may create to supplement the lesson plans. One of their teachers "may" come up with an idea or app that "may" be worth a lot of money and they will want some of the profits. Its the same with student work, one of the students might create something valuable and try to sell it. I do programming on the side and use a lot of the programs in my classroom (games and things like that). I doubt if I will ever make any money selling any of these, but just in case I applied for a programming job with the district (that I knew I would never get). If I ever do come up with a million dollar idea and they try to take it, this will be the first thing I ask them about when it goes to court. If they tried to take a million dollar idea from a student, the publicity would be the end of the school board.

    1. Re:Not Lesson plans or normal student work by n6kuy · · Score: 1

      I hate that word, "rubric" as used by educrats.
      It's just dopey.

      --
      If you disagree with me on social issues, then it's pretty clear that you are a narrow-minded bigot.
  60. what is this "contract" of which you speak? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The vast majority of employees (even in California) do NOT have a contract. They might have an offer letter or email, but neither of those rise to a "contract". They probably sign an "assignment of intellectual property" or some such during their new-hire indoctrination. And there's probably an employee handbook of dubious worth, which also doesn't rise to the level of a contract.

  61. Wait a second! by MarkvW · · Score: 1

    The State compels the student to go to school.
    The State compels the student to do the schoolwork.
    The State asserts ownership of the schoolwork.

    Now let's assume that the student writes a bestselling novel derived from his schoolwork.

    Does that belong to the State?

    (a) The moment such an insane statute passes, the school district is going to be sued by a lawyer parents claiming that the State is taking the property of their child and that they are entitled to just compensation for the taking. Is the school district REALLY going to spend tax dollars defending their right to Little Sally's stick figure drawing?

    (b) The school district is also going to have a hell of a time demonstrating how taking the student's work is rationally related to educating that student.

    Some crazy morons need to get elected off the school board.

  62. Government can't own copyright by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Government can't own copyright, and the school is owned by the government. The End.

  63. Trending Towards Non-Ownership by Common+Joe · · Score: 1

    If a board of education (not even a business) is thinking about claiming copyright for things that are not theirs, where will it stop? It doesn't matter if they do it or don't do it. It doesn't matter if they lose a battle in court. This is a common thought that many people in power are thinking: how can I claim someone else's idea as our own and make money off of it while screwing them? We see it all the time in the business world. (Especially the music world, but in many other areas as well.) This is a trend that is not slowing down. I would say this article is an indication that it is accelerating.

    Indeed, how long will it be before I write a story or make a drawing or write a program at my home in my own privacy only to have it considered Microsoft property or property of the government?

  64. read the fine print by KingAlanI · · Score: 1

    The 13th Amendment contains the loophole "except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted"

    --
    I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
  65. Another point of view by abigsmurf · · Score: 1

    The teacher thing of "in their own time with their own materials" is misleading. Teachers are paid and expected to do work out of school hours as part of their salary. Also, if a teacher decides to create and market their own teaching materials or write about a new teaching method, they have access to lots of classes of kids with which to test their product on. They could be getting paid by the state to do research that will ultimately only benefit them, using other people's children as Guinea pigs.

  66. Then the school already has a lesson plan. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Therefore the teacher doesn't have to make one.

    Right?

  67. ABOLISH COPYRIGHT. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    IP law is bullshit. It does not and never will protect content creation or encourage the creation of content. It is a system for middle men to profiteer. The stupidity and greed demonstrated here show that it is beyond salvage. Scrap it in its existing form. BURN IT WITH FIRE.

  68. Foreseeable result by DirtyLiar · · Score: 1

    A foreseeable result of bringing current "total business" (like the Germen concept of "Total War") corprate culture into schools.

    --

    THINK! It's patriotic

  69. Typical Taker Mentality by DirtyLiar · · Score: 1

    You know, there ARE Makers and Takers in our society, and while the Makers Make, the Takers feel they are entitled to take a big percentage right off the top of whatever profits the Makers bring in.

    They think bloviation adds value, hold countless pointless meetings, attempt to make real money out of accounting tricks, and love words like synergy and downsizing.

    This is just another instance of Takers trying to steal the work of others, so as to avoid the process of having to work themselves to produce something of REAL, tangible value.

    They are parasites who's only real talent, if they have any at all, is to leave with their booty before the destruction they've wrought encompases themselves too.

    I can't help but think of another current /. story that theorises that there have been no real inventions in the past 50 years. If it's true, is there any wonder?

    Why is the incentive to create only extended to businesses in the current economic model? Why do those who wax poetic about how the OWNERS of creative works must be "incentivised" to create, while refusing provide any real incentives to the people who ACTUALLY create?

    Who WOULDN'T feel excited to contribute to their employer's bottom line if they were to see rewards commencerate with the impact their ideas and work had on that bottom line?

    --

    THINK! It's patriotic

  70. Those who can, DO... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Those who CAN'T, manage.

  71. Not even outside the USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is quite a difference to speak in the voice of the parents/in loco parentis, and to *take over* the copyright of what the student does. This goes well beyond the responsibility we give our schools.

  72. Sounds like Texas by Fujisawa+Sensei · · Score: 1

    Sounds like that liberty loving state Texas to me.

    --
    If someone is passing you on the right, you are an asshole for driving in the wrong lane.
  73. Re: Semi-off topic by girlinatrainingbra · · Score: 1

    Yeah, it could be considered a copyright violation if you didn't have to waive copyright and assign perpetual use license over to turnitin when you in fact actually turn it in. That's the insidious part of this: certain schools and teachers require you to use turnitin to actually turn your homework in. The few students that have fought against this and have lost their cases appear to have lost their cases because they actually (at least once) used the service to turn in their homework, thereby agreeing to the terms and conditions of the service, with one of the terms being that you grant turnitin a perpetual license to your work.
    .
    People! Stand up for yourselves and your own work! Students are NOT employees of a school, whether elementary or high-school or college level!!! Their work is not done as "work for hire": it is done as a compulsory portion of their education and training!!! Not as work!

  74. A Teacher Chimes In by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I work for a school district and a large corporation in my spare time (developing simulations). They are each aware of the other committment. If either employer claimed copyright over the work that I am doing for the other, I would be put in the position of suing with the full resources of the other.

    Fortunately, neither employer interferes with the other.

  75. All Your Mind Belong to Us by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All Your Mind Belong to Us

  76. Rights Grabbing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Instead of all this vile rights grabbing in which employers seem to be engaging, why not just establish an options system for the companies much like the employees enjoy. Something like the employer has the option to buy up to 10% ownership of the rights to the employees idea at a rate of 10% of the employees highest yearly wage per percent of ownership. With the options expiring after one year, or the employees termination whichever is earlier.

  77. Trade Schools by Hobadee · · Score: 1

    Many trade schools have a right to their students work. I went to one and part of the student agreement I signed was a perpetual license to use my work created there royalty-free for advertising purposes. I saw no problem with that, especially since the agreement specifically said that I still owned the copyright to the work.

    --
    ...Had this been an actual emergency, we would have fled in terror, and you would not have been informed.
  78. Fucked up priorities... by abuelos84 · · Score: 1

    Seriously?
    Are they really discussing freaking "ownership of content" in a school?
    Maybe they should focus on... I don't know... Educating kids?

    I know that in the US, schools are pretty much shopping malls, but c'mon...

    --
    -- Counting backwards since 1984!
  79. Public School therefor Public Domain by Changa_MC · · Score: 1

    Government agencies like NASA cannot charge for distribution of materials they create - all government documents are public domain.
    Public Schools are government agencies.
    If student and teacher works belong to the schools, they are public domain works.

    --
    Changa hates change.
  80. For Sale by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My child's school just sent home a flyer (after the fact) saying that our daughter made some artwork that will be on display in a local gallery. They also noted that it would be available for purchase, but all money from the purchase will go to the school.

    I asked my wife ---- "Umm, did they even consider who holds the copyright on my 5 year old's creative works?".

    I have no issues with supporting the school by any means -- but nobody on the staff appears to have considered this.