A CPD25 event organised by Chris Morrison and Jane Secker with presentations from members of Sherlock, the London and South East Copyright Community of Practice. Held at Woburn House on 26 February 2018.

1. Copyright Support in Higher
Education: A Tale in Two
Parts

2. Your Chairs
Chris Morrison
University of Kent
Jane Secker
City, University of
London

3. Programme
13:30 – 13:50
Introduction to copyright literacy as experienced as a community of
practice
Chris Morrison – University of Kent & Jane Secker – City, University of London
13:50 – 15:00
Part 1: Copyright and Teaching
Chris Morrison – University of Kent
Irene Barranco Garcia – University of Greenwich
Claire Kidwell – Trinity Laban Conservatoire
Kate Vasili – University of Middlesex
15:00 – 15.20 Break
15.20 – 16.30
Part 2: Copyright and Research
Jane Secker – City, University of London
Stephen Penton – City, University of London
Philippa Hatch – Imperial College London
Monique Ritchie – Brunel University
16:30 – 17:00 Concluding Remarks

4. Copyright Literacy as
experienced as a Community
of Practice
Chris Morrison
City, University of LondonUniversity of Kent
Jane Secker

6. “Excited - like the idea
that copyright is a
gateway. Should enable
access to culture, rather
than barrier”
“Warm and Fuzzy”
“Love it! It's kept
me in the lifestyle
to which I have
become
accustomed”

7. “Confused,
cautious,
faintly
nauseous!”
“Frustrated,
confused. Can I
risk it? Can my
organisation
risk it?”
“Worried, anxious”
“Like the
receiver (and
thrower) of a
hot potato”

8. DON’T
BE
AFRAID
George Lucas

9. Hargreaves Review

10. The survey

11. Copyright Games
Copyright the Card Game
The Publishing Trap

12. A world without copyright
literacy
Things go unsaid
Reduces the
public domain
Increases costs
Risk aversion

13. Copyright Literacy
Education
not training
Balance between
content and approach
Getting comfortable
with uncertainty
Avoiding binaries
?

14. The role of the copyright officer
Hatch, Morrison & Secker 2017

15. 66% of institutions in
the UK have a
designated copyright
officer (higher in Higher
Education)
63% of them are based
in the Library
65% of institutions have
additional staff also
involved in copyright
matters
Significant investment
in copyright support
Headline findings
Hatch, Morrison & Secker 2017

16. Favourite sources of copyright
advice
LIS-Copyseek
IPO website /
the legislation
Books e.g.
Secker and
Morrison
Hatch, Morrison & Secker 2017

17. Communities
of practice

18. Community of practice
• The term was coined by Jean Lave and
Etienne Wenger in 1991
• It is for groups who share a profession or craft
and it allows them to develop tacit or implicit
knowledge and expertise.
• Based on story telling
Lave & Wenger (1991) Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation

19. SHERLOCK

20. Teaching and copyright: what
are the key issues?
Chris Morrison
Claire Kidwell, Irene Barranco
Garcia, Kate Vasili

21. There’s a book for this…
Copyright and E-Learning: A
guide for practitioners (2nd
Edition)
Jane Secker
with Chris Morrison
Free chapter on copyright
education and training

22. History of copyright and teaching
• Some provisions in UK law since 1911
(Educational Anthologies) and 1956 Act
• Photocopying in 1960s & 1970s created
tension between educators and publishers
• Balance struck in CDPA 1988 Act – exception-
backed licensing schemes
• UUK v CLA (2001)
• Hargreaves review (2011) and subsequent
reform (2014)

23. Education exceptions & licences
Statutory Exceptions Licences
Quotation
Illustration for
Instruction
Recording of
Broadcasts
Educational
Copying of
Extracts
Creative
Commons
Library
e-resources
Website
Terms
Bespoke
permission
Educational
Performance
Exception

24. Quotation and Illustration for
Instruction
Two key exceptions for teaching

25. The legislationS.32 Criticism, review[F1, quotation] and news reporting.
(1)Fair dealing with a work for the purpose of criticism or review, of that or another work or of a performance of a work, does not
infringe any copyright in the work provided that it is accompanied by a sufficient acknowledgement [F2 (unless this would be impossible
for reasons of practicality or otherwise)] [F3 and provided that the work has been made available to the public].
[F4(1ZA)Copyright in a work is not infringed by the use of a quotation from the work (whether for criticism or review or otherwise)
provided that—
(a)the work has been made available to the public,
(b)the use of the quotation is fair dealing with the work,
(c)the extent of the quotation is no more than is required by the specific purpose for which it is used, and
(d)the quotation is accompanied by a sufficient acknowledgement (unless this would be impossible for reasons of practicality or otherwise).]
[F5(1A)For the purposes of [F6subsections (1) and (1ZA)] a work has been made available to the public if it has been made available by
any means, including—
(a)the issue of copies to the public;
(b)making the work available by means of an electronic retrieval system;
(c)the rental or lending of copies of the work to the public;
(d)the performance, exhibition, playing or showing of the work in public;
(e)the communication to the public of the work,
but in determining generally for the purposes of [F7those subsections] whether a work has been made available to the public no
account shall be taken of any unauthorised act.]
(2)Fair dealing with a work (other than a photograph) for the purpose of reporting current events does not infringe any copyright in the
work provided that (subject to subsection (3)) it is accompanied by a sufficient acknowledgement.
(3)No acknowledgement is required in connection with the reporting of current events by means of a sound recording, film [F8 or
broadcast where this would be impossible for reasons of practicality or otherwise].
[F9(4)To the extent that a term of a contract purports to prevent or restrict the doing of any act which, by virtue of subsection (1ZA),
would not infringe copyright, that term is unenforceable
Section 32 Illustration for instruction
(1)Fair dealing with a work for the sole purpose of illustration for instruction does not infringe copyright in the work provided that the
dealing is—
(a)for a non-commercial purpose,
(b)by a person giving or receiving instruction (or preparing for giving or receiving instruction), and
(c)accompanied by a sufficient acknowledgement (unless this would be impossible for reasons of practicality or otherwise).
(2)Fo th pu pos s of subs tio (1), “ ivi o ivi i st u tio ” i ud s s tti x mi tio qu stio s, ommu i ti g the
questions to pupils and answering the questions.
(3)To the extent that a term of a contract purports to prevent or restrict the doing of any act which, by virtue of this section, would not
infringe copyright, that term is unenforceable.

27. Claire Kidwell
Trinity Laban Conservatoire of Music and Dance

28. •
• Link instead of uploading?
•Link to a legitimate site rather
than an infringing one
•Copyright v public domain?
•Copyright Licensing Agency
•Newspaper Licensing Agency
•Educational Recording Agency
•S.30
Criticism/review/quotation
•S.32 Illustration for Instruction
•S.36 Copying by educational
establishments
•What has the rights holder
permitted?
•CC licence or other form of
words?
Primary
licence
Exceptions
Alternatives?
Secondary
licence
Sourcing Legitimate Materials for Use in Teaching

29. A lecturer is delivering a class on the opera Albert Herring by Benjamin Britten for a music
history module. She wants to include each of the following on the VLE page for that module
purely as contextual reading/listening/viewing. There is no accompanying commentary, and
students are not being required to comment or answer questions on the sources.
a) For each example, how might the lecturer make the content legitimately available via
the VLE?
b) If instead of using the VLE she instead wanted to hand out photocopies of 1-3 and play 4
and 5 through AV equipment in class, would the situation be any different?
Chowrimootoo, Christopher. ‘The Timely Traditions of
b t H i ’. The Opera Quarterly 27(4), 379-419
Article from print journal not held by the
institution
Peter Evans, The Music of Benjamin Britten. University of
Minnesota Press, 1979, 620-648
Extract from book held by the institution. CLA
“ h k p missio s” shows s i is p ohibit d
Britten, Benjamin. Albert Herring : a Comic Opera in Three
Acts. Boosey and Hawkes, 1948
The complete printed score
Britten, Benjamin. Albert Herring. Video recording of
Glyndebourne Festival Opera production (March 1985).
Warner music vision, 2006
A DVD recording of a performance of the opera
Britten, Benjamin. Albert Herring. City of London Sinfonia.
Chandos records, 2003
A CD of the opera

30. GROUP DISCUSSION 1

31. The reality of finding and
using open-licensed
content in practice
Kate Vasili
Middlesex University

32. Open Licences

33. Open Access CC Publications e.g. BMJ Open
Library of Congress CC0 1.0 Universal
Finding Content

34. Issues
• Content and CC Licence not added by copyright
owner or authorised body.
Official Unofficial CC Licensed
https://youtu.be/qv64gSHZJl8 https://youtu.be/dhzWr9yKHPA

35. Issues
PD or Open Licensed content reused on sites without
correct accreditation or copyright status.
© Whitehouse © Copyright - IBG NEW (IBG
News Services Agency)
Copyright © 2017 The Temple
Emanon-El Streicker Center.

36. Issues
Corporate body claiming infringement of content not
owned by them and without authority to license.
See
• Getty & The Library of Congress Carol M. Highsmith
Archive http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-
fi-hiltzik-getty-copyright-20160729-snap-story.html
and
• N ws i s & D i Mo ’s Twitt im s
https://mashable.com/2013/01/15/twitter-photos-
permission/#QlYBI_jOWZq3

37. How can you determine if you
can rely on a CC/open licence
attached to the content?
Question for discussion on Creative Commons / open licensed content

38. Lecture recording and use
of YouTube
Irene Barranco Garcia
Collaborations, Compliance and Copyright Manager
University of Greenwich

39. Are you opt-in or opt-out?
• How is your institution managing lecture recording?
• How is your institution supporting academic staff?
• What guidance does your institution have in place?

40. Supporting/Scaring your
academics
• Do’s d Do ’t’s
• You Tube videos
• Commercially DVDs and CDs
• Scanning Materials
• Box of Broadcasts
• How/when to apply educational exceptions
• CC and free copyright materials: Do they exist?

41. Scenario
Consider a lecturer whose lecture is recorded using a
video from YouTube which is clearly illegal material.
What are the repercussions for the institution and
what message he/she is giving to the students?

43. GROUP DISCUSSION 2

44. PANEL DISCUSSION 1
Copyright and Teaching

45. Research and copyright: what
are the key issues?
Jane Secker
Stephen Penton, Philippa Hatch
and Monique Ritchie

46. Research and private study
• Much copying undertaken in higher education
falls under S. 29: Copying for Research and
Private Study
• Must be non-commercial
• Typically viewed as covering single copies
but…
• Is subject to fair dealing tests
• Also new exception to cover Text and Data
Mining (S.29A)

47. What has changed?
• Open access deposit of theses (often mandatory)
– Decisions over whether thesis is embargoed
– Dealing with images and other third party copyright
– Licensing choices for thesis e.g. Creative Commons
– All increases need for copyright education and PhD
students
• Op ss d fu d qui m ts fo ‘op ’
– Changes in the nature of scholarly communications and
publishing choices more broadly
– Need for advice and managing funding of APCs
– Data / open data – usi oth p op ’s d sh i you
own data openly

48. Collaborative research
• Many researchers work in national and
international teams so want to share
resources
• Work collaboratively using digital tools e.g.
Mendeley, Dropbox, Evernote etc.
• Copyright exceptions are generally for
individual users not sharing
• Copyright and systematic reviews: recent blog
post by Jane Falconer at LSHTM

49. Copyright education and PhD
students
Jane Secker
City, University of London

50. What are the issues?
• PhD students have many competing demands on their time:
– To make a contribution to knowledge
– To write their thesis and successfully pass their viva
– To develop as a researcher: learning research methods /
research skills appropriate to their discipline
– To publish in their research (now common pre-submission)
– To get experience in teaching
• All of this means copyright / copyright literacy rarely a priority
• Copyright exceptions often apply (S. 29, S. 30, S. 32)
• Copyright issues often only come to light after submission –
on the point of deposit in the institutional repository

51. A hypothetical* scenario
PhD student in geography / urban planning has completed their
thesis on the impact of tall buildings on cities, passed their viva and
sends their thesis to the library (open access deposit is mandatory).
They carried out all their research collecting data from a wide
variety of sources. Some of the data is photographs and plans
collected from architects of cities and buildings and over 100 of
these are reproduced (credited) in full in their thesis.
The Open Access team has found these images and asks the PhD
student if they had permission – they say they were collected as
p t of th s h d it’s u if th i hts ow s (th
several) granted permission to include them in the thesis. The
student has never attended any copyright training.
*based loosely on reality

52. In thi cenario…..
What are the
copyright
issues?
Are there any
relevant
licences or
exceptions?
What are the
risks? Who
bears the
risk?
What can be
done or what
should have
happened?

53. Copyright Support in Higher
Education: A Tale in Two Parts
26 February 2018
Stephen Penton (Copyright Librarian, City, University of London)
Stephen.penton@city.ac.uk
Twitter: @PentonLibrary

54. Law:
• Criticism & review (s30)
• Illustration (s32)
• Fair dealing
• Contract override
Images and third party copyright
General points:
• Guidance to students, repository
• Takedown notice
• …to be made publicly available
• Assess risk
• Duration of copyright (s12-15A)
o Literary, dramatic, musical or artistic works: death + 70 yrs
o Typographical arrangement of published editions: 25 yrs after publication
• Photographs are more complicated: Padfield (2015), p278
Creative Commons:
• May be feasible for thesis for generic material - teach students
how to search Flickr and Google for suitable content

55. Scenario: Music thesis about memorising piano music
• ‘Vertigo’ by Rhian Samuel (1944- ) - Many short extracts (17 bars in
total) reproduced in text; complete reproduction of all 46 bars in text
• Prelude in E flat op 23 no 6 by Sergei Rachmaninov (1873-1943) - 10
bars in total reproduced in text; complete reproduction in appendix
Images and third party copyright
Rachmaninov: Prelude
bars 9-10, annotations
by Yi, Chenyin
(2014)

56. References
Li, Chenyin (2014) Piano performance: strategies for score memorisation.
City, University of London. Available at
http://openaccess.city.ac.uk/8530/1/Piano_performance_-
_strategies_for_score_memorisation.pdf (Accessed 15 February 2018)
Padfield, T (2015) Copyright for archivists and records
managers. 5th ed. London: Facet Publishing.
Images and third party copyright

57. GROUP DISCUSSION 3

58. Copyright, scholarly
communications and publishing
choices
Philippa Hatch
icons curtosy of the noun project (www.thenounproject.com)

59. Copyright & publishing a journal article
Submitted version Accepted Author Manuscript Published version
“Lots of
d fts”
Publishing
agreement
£ 1,500 - 5,000
£
0
Peer
review
Traditional
Open Access
icons by the noun project (www.thenounproject.com)
pay
to
read
Free
to
read
&
share

60. Scenario
A researcher at your institution is writing a new research paper and
asks if she can include a couple of figures from two of her earlier
papers (I can bring photocopies of papers /figures)
a) Paper one was published in a well known journal in their field and
copyright was assigned to the publisher when the publishing
agreement was signed.
b) Paper two was published in PLOS ONE, a fully open access journal
in which all articles are published under a Creative Commons
Attribution Licence.
Q. What advice would you give?
icons curtosy of the noun project (www.thenounproject.com)

61. Copyright Support in Higher
Education: a Tale in Two Parts
Monique Ritchie
Associate Head: Scholarly Communication and Rights
E monique.ritchie@brunel.ac.uk
Brunel University London
Library Services, Information Services
Twitter @brunelcopyright | @copyrightmuse
Woburn House, Tavistock Square, London, 26 February 2018
Data and Open Data: sharing (or not!)
your own and using other people’s
data
Isambard Kingdom Brunel

62. Brunel University London
Data and open data
Background and drivers to open data in HE
> Data sharing
Institutions, funders and governments have open data policies, and compliance with
these are required as a condition of funding. However, many barriers to data sharing
exist: legal, cultural, and technical.
> Data rights
Highly complex - ownership of research data is often unclear. There can be multiple
layers of rights or stakeholders with competing © or IP claims (e.g. HEI / funder /
researcher / industry sponsor / all or several of the above?
Overlaps with other legislation often exist (e.g. data protection, FOI), ethics, trade
secrets, confidentiality, sensitive or commercially exploitable data / IP.

63. Brunel University London
Data and open data
> Data sharing and copyright
Fair dealing statutory exceptions in the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act (CDPA)
1988 (as amended) are vital for open data, including:
> S.29 Research and private study for non-commercial research
S.29A Text and data mining exception (TDM) for third party data can be used for
non-commercial research
S.30 Criticism, review, quotation and news reporting can be used to communicate
the research findings, e.g. via scholarly publishing and archiving
> Data sharing culture
Not all researchers are comfortable with sharing data. There are benefits: research
profile, impact, citations, but many have concerns about competitors from other HEIs
and industry, or are confused by the complexity of the landscape
> Data sharing infrastructure
Institutions, publishers, funders are investing in data sharing infrastructure – archives,
tools, standards, staff, training, policies and procedures. Infrastructure not yet mature,
making it more difficult to share your own data in a systematic way and to find reliable
open data to reuse.
Presentation Title 67

64. Brunel University London
Scenario (fictional, but plausible…)
> Professor Leo Ryan is a Bio-Engineering specialist. His research is interdisciplinary, working with
a team of researchers from Sports Sciences, Health Sciences and Engineering disciplines.
> His research team, for which he is the Principal Investigator (PI) has recently secured a £2.5
million grant co-funded by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC),
Innovate UK (UK government run innovation funding agency), Run4Life (a top UK biomechanics
private firm), and Titanium Kinetics (a US biomechanics tech firm) and NHS England.
> The grant has been secured with other researchers from 3 other universities, 2 in the UK and 1 in
the US. Two commercial researchers, one from each firm are also part of the team. Professor
Ryan and team also supervise 5 PhD students who are working on the project – several of these
are EPSRC funded students, 2 are self-funded.
> The project focuses on biomechanics in sport, to design new technology and tools to help improve
sports performance for disabled athletes, and to help recovery from trauma, and will use NHS
patient data as well as run trials on real-life athletes from all levels of sport (including high profile
stars and local club athletes).
> Professor Ryan and team are publishing articles throughout the project, and there are open data
requirements from several of the institutions, and the funder. Innovate UK and industry sponsors
do not want data to be released, as they are developing products based on the research for
commercial sale. Some of these might be cutting-edge inventions.
> One of the doctoral students, an international student, has just been awarded her PhD and has
left, but has returned home, taking some of the data with her. She also designed a programme to
access the data but has not archived this, and so some of the data is inaccessible.
68

65. GROUP DISCUSSION 4

66. PANEL DISCUSSION 2
Copyright and Research

67. Summary
Copyright in Higher Education

69. Join us on the journey!
Embrace copyright
literacy!

70. Tuesday 3rd April 2018 at the University of Liverpool.
Bookings close 12 March 2018

71. Further reading
Hatch, P., Morrison, C and Secker J. (2017) A study of copyright specialists in UK educational and
cultural institutions: who are they and what do they do? Available at:
https://ukcopyrightliteracy.files.wordpress.com/2017/12/copyright-officers-survey-report-final.pdf
Morrison, C and Secker J. (2015) Copyright Literacy in the UK: a survey of librarians and other cultural
heritage sector professionals. Library and Information Research. 39 (121)
http://www.lirgjournal.org.uk/lir/ojs/index.php/lir/article/view/675
Morrison, C and Secker, J (2016) Exceptions for libraries. Copyrightuser.org. Available online.
Chris Morrison, Jane Secker, “Understanding librarians’ experiences of copyright: findings from a
phenomenographic study of UK information professionals”, Library Management ,
https://doi.org/10.1108/LM-01-2017-0011
Morrison, C and Secker, J. (2016) A Guide to Copyright. Association of University Administrators.
Rios-Amaya, Juliana, Secker, Jane and Morrison, Chris (2016) Lecture recording in higher education:
risky business or evolving open practice. LSE / University of Kent, London, UK.
http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/68275/
Secker, J and Morrison, C. (2016) Copyright and E-learning: a guide for practitioners. Facet publishing: London.
Chapter 6: Copyright education and training available online.
Todorova, T., Trencheva, T., Kurbanoğlu, S., Dogan G., & Horvat, A. (2014) A Multinational Study on
Copyright Literacy Competencies of LIS Professionals. Presentation given at 2nd European Conference
on Information Literacy (ECIL) held in Dubrovnik. October 2014. Retrieved March 13, 2015 from
http://ecil2014.ilconf.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Todorova.pdf
https://copyrightliteracy.org @UKCopyrightLit

72. Image Credits
Slide 1: Photo by Chris Morrison made by Photofunia
Slide 4: Photo from Unsplash.com CC-0
Slide 5: Photo at CILIP Copyright Conference 2017 © James Bennett used with permission
Slide 6: Photo by Amber Litzinger https://flic.kr/p/bEXT6H CC-BY
Slide 7: Panic by Nate Stelnerhttps://flic.kr/p/us2aa Public Domain
Slide 8: George Lucas, taken from Wikipedia CC-BY-NC
Slide 12: A world without copyright literacy: images from Open clipart. Risk by Brad Clinesmith:
https://flic.kr/p/aWW978 CC-BY
Slide 13: Copyright literacy: images from Open clipart
Slide 14: Lego police officer byMartin @pokipsie Rechsteiner https://flic.kr/p/qmMDmS CC-BY
Slide 17: Kent copyright community of practice. Photo by Chris Morrison.
Slide 20: Photo by NeONBRAND on Unsplash CC-0
Slide 49 & 56: Photo from Unsplash.com CC-0
Slide 72: Kitchener Wants You by Alfred Leete, modified by Chris Morrison
Slide 73: A team van taken from http://www.myateamvan.com/