25.1 The role of university faculty in the oer world  (Page 2/6)

Non-commercial

Should others be allowed to make a profit from the work of university faculty?

If a faculty member is paid to think, should a faculty member be allowed to make additional income from work that they are already paid to do? If so, doesn’t that give the faculty member an unfair market advantage over the non-academic in the field who does not have the benefit of the safety net of tenure and university? If people are not allowed to reap the rewards of their efforts why would the best and smartest of the human race become university faculty? Can we truly count on the fact that there are enough altruists in the world who are willing to work below market wage? Is the lifetime contract of tenure a fair exchange for the income that could be earned in the commercial sector? If it is true that most faculty could not make more money in the commercial sector, should a distinction be made among those who can and cannot make a great wage outside the academy?

Should others be allowed to make a profit from the work of university faculty? If the commercial sector is not allowed to commoditize the work – or in other terms, turn the theory into application –, are we as society deprived of the benefits of the work of university faculty? If the commercial sector is prevented from participating in this portion of the knowledge sector, is society potentially deprived of the brainpower of a significantly large portion of the population who are, in many ways, contributing to the advancement of the knowledge base of society? Because in many parts of the world it is expected that faculty members will go out and work on projects outside the university in order to pay their salaries, is it more or less important that the work be made non-commercial in the OER space?

Non-derivative

Should derivative works be allowed on the work of university faculty?

Is the work of university faculty different in some way as to justify protection from others preparing derivative works? If yes, isn’t it taking this arguably more well thought out knowledge out of the web 2.0 process where the power of the network of communities can add to an already strong base? If we allow derivative works on the work of university faculty will those creating derivative work leverage the name of the faculty to advance their own ideology in ways unintended by the faculty member who initially created the work thus damaging the reputation of the faculty member who originally entered the content? Does this deter those with good reputations from putting their ideas into the marketplace for fear of having them twisted into something unintended? Does this then have a chilling effect on the creation of something truly innovative?

I look forward to your responses.

Comments

1. richardwyles - may 1st, 2008 at 5:07 pm

Great framework for some serious discussion. I offer my perspectives but not from a faculty perspective. I work with OERs and FOSS but no longer from within an education institution. These comments are perspectives to further encourage debate, not attempts at answers.