Are Students Legally able to produce FOSS?

[Beamerboy]

I arrived at an interesting question today whilst I was sat in my rather boring lecture and figured it would be an interesting one to present to this community.

Given that the majority of Universities apply clauses in the University<>Student contract which grant them majority rights over any Intellectual Property you produce which is related to or part of your subject of study. Is it then impossible, from a legal standpoint, for a student of computer science or information systems, to produce GPL'd software?

If the student has no majority claim over the IP, then they presumably have no right to apply license of any form on their works.

The reason I think this is interesting, is because I would be suprised if there are not many GPL'd (or otherwise licensed) projects out there which were andare being developed by students governed by such contracts. In fact, I would be confident enough to state that there are a lot of projects out there which fall under this category.

So what do people think?

Paladine

[Chillee]

This sort of restriction doesn't apply to project outside the subject of the studies. So only homework are concerned, not personal projects.

[Beamerboy]

This sort of restriction doesn't apply to project outside the subject of the studies. So only homework are concerned, not personal projects.
That isn't true. The contracts I have seen (and signed) are very wordy and normally include any project which can be deemed to have been influenced by any knowledge you have attained as a result of your studies.

Paladine

[Brunellus]

A good question to put to the likes of Eben Moglen.

[kylevan]

That isn't true. The contracts I have seen (and signed) are very wordy and normally include any project which can be deemed to have been influenced by any knowledge you have attained as a result of your studies.

Paladine

So all future work you do is property of the University? I guess if you get a job coding, your employer and the Uni will have to litigate it out. :rolleyes:

[Beamerboy]

So all future work you do is property of the University? I guess if you get a job coding, your employer and the Uni will have to litigate it out. :rolleyes:
No not all future work. The clauses tend to be time limited to about 5 years after graduation. These rights have been eforced in the past as well. One of my local universities was reported to have sued a company that was created by an ex student, for damages under IP Law and apparantly made a lot of money from it.

I should also explainthat all these contracts tend to differ. Some universities are more restrictive than others, but generally all universities apply contract clauses giving them IP rights over student inventions.

Paladine

[zachtib]

No not all future work. The clauses tend to be time limited to about 5 years after graduation. These rights have been eforced in the past as well. One of my local universities was reported to have sued a company that was created by an ex student, for damages under IP Law and apparantly made a lot of money from it.

Paladine

This is sort of ridiculous. I'm a computer science major now, but I've yet to learn a thing in any of my Computer Science courses that I didn't know already, and not one line of code I've written outside of class has been influenced by something I learned during a lecture. Unless, of course, you count the numerous times I've taken one of my O'Reilly books to class and read it while the professor drones on about something I taught myself years ago. I'm not going to school to learn how to code so much as to obtain proof that I can, indeed, code.

[Beamerboy]

This is sort of ridiculous. I'm a computer science major now, but I've yet to learn a thing in any of my Computer Science courses that I didn't know already, and not one line of code I've written outside of class has been influenced by something I learned during a lecture. Unless, of course, you count the numerous times I've taken one of my O'Reilly books to class and read it while the professor drones on about something I taught myself years ago. I'm not going to school to learn how to code so much as to obtain proof that I can, indeed, code.
It is ridiculous, thats true. It isjust yet one more controversial issue regarding intellectual property. However, that doesn't make it any less serious or important.

In your situation, the responsibility of proving you had prior knowledge and did not attain that knowledge from the course, would be yours. Which in any circumstance would be incredibly difficult to do.

Paladine

[hkgonra]

This is sort of ridiculous. I'm a computer science major now, but I've yet to learn a thing in any of my Computer Science courses that I didn't know already, and not one line of code I've written outside of class has been influenced by something I learned during a lecture. Unless, of course, you count the numerous times I've taken one of my O'Reilly books to class and read it while the professor drones on about something I taught myself years ago. I'm not going to school to learn how to code so much as to obtain proof that I can, indeed, code.

T/J
LOL isn't it ridiculous that you have to have that sheet of paper to prove you know what you are doing and really get paid.
From what I have seen of university IT programs it would be like a person that has built nascar engines is told by his local chevrolet dealer he needs to go to school and get certified to be able to be a mechanic for them. So he goes to school and all they teach him is how to work on Model T's but he has that paper now so he gets the job. ](*,) ](*,)
T/J off.

[zachtib]

Awesome, I just looked this up on my university's webpage:



b. Students. Students who independently create Intellectual Property arising out of their participation in programs of study at the University, and that do not result from their employment by the University, will retain the legal rights thereto. Intellectual Property created by students through the use of Specialized Resources or in connection with their employment by the University is owned by the ULRF.


Deluge is in the clear! :mrgreen:

[Steveire]

You should also get your employer (if you work as a programmer) or your school, if any, to sign a "copyright disclaimer" for the program, if necessary. Here is a sample; alter the names:
Yoyodyne, Inc., hereby disclaims all copyright
interest in the program `Gnomovision'
(which makes passes at compilers) written
by James Hacker.

signature of Ty Coon, 1 April 1989
Ty Coon, President of Vice


http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html#SEC4

[Beamerboy]

Awesome, I just looked this up on my university's webpage:



Deluge is in the clear! :mrgreen:
I wouldn't be cheering too loudly. The clause is worded in such as way as to make it very difficult for you to claim your invention was not the result of the knowledge you attained from your course.

For example, if you study recursive algorithms as part of your course in computer science and then create a piece of software which relies on recursion, it would be pretty much impossible for you to prove that your invention is not related to your studies.

It is a legal minefield and the contract clauses are vague for a reason, that being, it makes it much easier for their much more experienced and higher paid lawyers to destroy you in court.

Paladine

[Beamerboy]

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html#SEC4
Yes I knew about that already, but it is impossible to regulate or validate because it relies on 2 things:

1. The student being aware that they don't hold IP rights.
2. The student being honest enough to follow that particular requirement set out by gnu.

Paladine

[prizrak]

Generally speaking it only applies to something created using University resources. So if you do it on your own time/computer you are OK. If you are doing it in a computer lab then they have the right.

The same actually applies to IT employment, the company I'm with now retains all the rights to any inventions I create for as long as I am employed by them. Doesn't matter if I do it at home on my own machine.

[earobinson]

from my expirence most com sci departments use a lot of linux, and so they do give back a fair amount to the linux community.

[Brunellus]

from my expirence most com sci departments use a lot of linux, and so they do give back a fair amount to the linux community.
not relevant to the question. "Giving back" is not the same as knowing who has the rights to IP generated on University time.

[Beamerboy]

Generally speaking it only applies to something created using University resources. So if you do it on your own time/computer you are OK. If you are doing it in a computer lab then they have the right.

The same actually applies to IT employment, the company I'm with now retains all the rights to any inventions I create for as long as I am employed by them. Doesn't matter if I do it at home on my own machine.
Resources is not restricted to specialised equipment or facilities. For example, here is such a clause from a UK University:

"2.1 In the event that an undergraduate student or a postgraduate student on a taught course generates intellectual property in the course of a University project, either solely or in collaboration (where the collaborators may be fellow students, members of University of Bristol staff, employees of a sponsoring organisation or collaborative partner or a combination thereof), he or she is asked to assign to the University any intellectual property that he or she may generate. Assignment will only take place in the event that intellectual property is generated. A student shall then give to the University all reasonable assistance to enable the University to obtain patents or other forms of legal protection for the intellectual property."

That clause specifically classifies knowledge as a resource via the collaboration argument. As I said, these rights have been enforced in the past with regards to big money inventions, but the same rights apply for any invention, irrespective of whether it makes money, so it does potentially put FOSS licenses in these circumstances, at risk of being invalidated and liable for IP damages.

Paladine

[zachtib]

I wouldn't be cheering too loudly. The clause is worded in such as way as to make it very difficult for you to claim your invention was not the result of the knowledge you attained from your course.

that's what I take the "arising out of participation in programs of study at the University" to mean. I'm not employed by the university, so that line doesn't apply to me, leaving only "through the use of Specialized Resources" and I assume that that is referring to the use of campus property, hardware, etc that might not be accessible to the average user.

on top of that, as I'm not the only person working on deluge, wouldn't it that make it hard for the university to specify exactly which parts of it were created by me and thus "owned" by them? Not that I'd expect my university to try and claim ownership over a bittorrent client. Also, as I'm using a GPL'd library, wouldn't I be compelled to release the code under the GPL as well, meaning that the university could "own" it, but it would still be free.

at the very least, I should be good for a few more years now, as I don't expect my school would want to **** me off and give me reason to leave so long as they're still collecting tuition from me.

[Beamerboy]

that's what I take the "arising out of participation in programs of study at the University" to mean. I'm not employed by the university, so that line doesn't apply to me, leaving only "through the use of Specialized Resources" and I assume that that is referring to the use of campus property, hardware, etc that might not be accessible to the average user.

on top of that, as I'm not the only person working on deluge, wouldn't it that make it hard for the university to specify exactly which parts of it were created by me and thus "owned" by them? Not that I'd expect my university to try and claim ownership over a bittorrent client. Also, as I'm using a GPL'd library, wouldn't I be compelled to release the code under the GPL as well, meaning that the university could "own" it, but it would still be free.

at the very least, I should be good for a few more years now, as I don't expect my school would want to **** me off and give me reason to leave so long as they're still collecting tuition from me.
I am not posing the question based on a specific instance or case though. I am looking at the potential threat it imposes. Whether Universities choose to enforce IP rights or not is irrelevant, the danger exists in the fact that they can do so if they wish, and thus potentially, leaves such projects at risk.

Paladine

[zachtib]

I am not posing the question based on a specific instance or case though. I am looking at the potential threat it imposes. Whether Universities choose to enforce IP rights or not is irrelevant, the danger exists in the fact that they can do so if they wish, and thus potentially, leaves such projects at risk.

Paladine

I'm not contesting that universities can do this, and I'm sure some have. I'm just hoping that the wording of the IP policy I referenced earlier implies that my university will be reasonable about such things.

[halfvolle melk]

No not all future work. The clauses tend to be time limited to about 5 years after graduation. These rights have been eforced in the past as well. One of my local universities was reported to have sued a company that was created by an ex student, for damages under IP Law and apparantly made a lot of money from it.
So CS students spend their first 5 years after graduation flipping burgers?

[Beamerboy]

I'm not contesting that universities can do this, and I'm sure some have. I'm just hoping that the wording of the IP policy I referenced earlier implies that my university will be reasonable about such things.
I hope you are correct in your interpretation. However, in the UK now Universities are "businesses" with a right to make profit. Sadly, history shows that businesses are not well known for being "reasonable" when it comes to IP Rights or anything else that is potentially restricting their revenue flow. And with IP increasingly becoming a commodity used for generating vast sums of money through litigious actions, it leaves me wondering how long it will be until such institutions "jump on the band wagon" so to speak.

I knew it was a can of worms before I posted the thread, but I felt it was important to discuss it, even if it only helps students to clarify their legal position regarding their "inventions" and help to empower them by making them safe from such litigious actions.

Paladine

[zachtib]

I hope you are correct in your interpretation.

so do i


who exactly would I have to talk to at my school to inquire about this?

[Beamerboy]

so do i


who exactly would I have to talk to at my school to inquire about this?
You could ask your head of department. If they didn't know personally, they should be able to refer you to someone who can answer your questions.

As I said, different Universities have different clauses, so there is no global answer to this one unfortunately.

Paladine

[hkgonra]

You do raise and interesting point.
Maybe the universities have been only seemingly reasonable because they are waiting for linux to get much more maket-share and then they will pounce on it and demand their money for it.

[Beamerboy]

You do raise and interesting point.
Maybe the universities have been only seemingly reasonable because they are waiting for linux to get much more maket-share and then they will pounce on it and demand their money for it.
It would be comforting to think this would never happen. But sadly, given the current climate involving IP rights, it is very hard to be confident on this issue.

Paladine

[xhaan]

This stuff can be avoided...
Find someone you can really trust and ghost write your app under their name and have them license it, as far as everyone else is concerned that person is the author, not you.

Sure, you don't get credit that way, but if all you want to do is make a program that is open and helpful, why do you need credit?

[prizrak]

Resources is not restricted to specialised equipment or facilities. For example, here is such a clause from a UK University:

"2.1 In the event that an undergraduate student or a postgraduate student on a taught course generates intellectual property in the course of a University project, either solely or in collaboration (where the collaborators may be fellow students, members of University of Bristol staff, employees of a sponsoring organisation or collaborative partner or a combination thereof), he or she is asked to assign to the University any intellectual property that he or she may generate. Assignment will only take place in the event that intellectual property is generated. A student shall then give to the University all reasonable assistance to enable the University to obtain patents or other forms of legal protection for the intellectual property."

That clause specifically classifies knowledge as a resource via the collaboration argument. As I said, these rights have been enforced in the past with regards to big money inventions, but the same rights apply for any invention, irrespective of whether it makes money, so it does potentially put FOSS licenses in these circumstances, at risk of being invalidated and liable for IP damages.

Paladine

That is a somewhat different dimension to it. It's understandable that anything you create while working on a university sponsored project should be their property. My point was more along the lines of side projects you do. Like If I were a CS student who was creating a new Linux DM, which wasn't part of any of my classes. If I were to use university resources (say their labs) then in alot of schools they would be entitled to that IP and I couldn't release it under the GPL.

[jpkotta]

As we throw the term IP around, does it mean patents, copyrights, or both?

[prizrak]

As we throw the term IP around, does it mean patents, copyrights, or both?

All of the above.

[Beamerboy]

As we throw the term IP around, does it mean patents, copyrights, or both?
Yup all of the above, IP can be patented or copyrighted, or neither. An invention doesn't need a patent or copyright to make money, thay are merely means of protecting its revenue stream.

Paladine

[MattSMiddleton]

That isn't true. The contracts I have seen (and signed) are very wordy and normally include any project which can be deemed to have been influenced by any knowledge you have attained as a result of your studies.

Paladine

I know that I've worked on projects, and actually been paid by the school to work on projects and they have no control over what I have produced. I know this b/c before signing the contracts we asked specifically and had lawyers look at it, so I'm not sure if your claim is correct in all cases. Your best bet is to look into it before you do anything. However this is just another case where IP muddy's the waters when it comes to FOSS.

[Beamerboy]

I know that I've worked on projects, and actually been paid by the school to work on projects and they have no control over what I have produced. I know this b/c before signing the contracts we asked specifically and had lawyers look at it, so I'm not sure if your claim is correct in all cases. Your best bet is to look into it before you do anything. However this is just another case where IP muddy's the waters when it comes to FOSS.
Oh I agree, my concerns were more theoretical than universal. Clearly it will not effect all students (as I have stated several times, the clauses used by each University differ), but many students are not even aware of IP restrictions being part of their University contract.

To test this I surveyed 120 students at my University on Thursday and only 2 knew about IP restrictions, yet all students of my University have signed the same contract restricting their rights to IP. I am confident that although this sample may be small, a similar pattern exists among all students. What was also alarming was how many of the students surveyed even knew what Intellectual Property is.

That is why I am concerned. If students have contributed to or writen FOSS either without being aware of IP restrictions or simply ignoring them, then it does potentially put a large number of projects into a legally delicate situation.

Paladine