After communication professor Robert Schrag decided to go public Sept. 7 about his idea to make his communication and technology course lectures available to his students for download, his dean and department head asked him to remove his site Wednesday afternoon until further notice.
Schrag had made his lectures available to students and the general public online for a fee of $2.50. The University questioned whether this practice was ethical, referring to the inconsistencies in opinion concerning intellectual property and decided to ask Schrag to suspend the Web site until copyright-issue clarifications could be made.
As a result, Schrag chose to delay his usual lecture in class Thursday in an effort to get his students' points of view on the situation.
"No one is sure who owns intellectual property [when it is spoken] and how it should be distributed," Schrag said.
Schrag passed out index cards to all students interested in voicing their opinions anonymously concerning the controversy. According to Schrag, the results of the survey showed 99 students wanted the Web site to continue, four students wanted the site to continue for free, 16 students had no opinion on the matter and no students felt a need for the site to be suspended.
John Elias, a sophomore in communication, said he felt his professor was justified in his actions.
"He's not forcing anyone to use or buy the lectures. As far as I see it, it's just another educational tool that's available for anyone," Elias said. "If he was using too much information from the textbook and not his own ideas then it would be a different story. As long as it's his ideas and his materials, it's fine."
While the class listened to Schrag's take on the situation, students began to throw around alternative ideas.
Mary Palles, a sophomore in communication, said she felt there were other ways for him to get the information out.
"If you were to do it through Vista, then people who are already paying the tuition would get to see it free of charge, whereas anyone can see it through the site that he used," she said.
Schrag said the information he teaches should not be restricted to just his students, therefore he would rather use a public access site to make his lectures available.
"I don't think it's a bad idea [that everyone can see it]," Schrag said. "If my intent is for you to walk away from here with all the information, then any way I can make that happen is fine."
Some students chose to address the idea of allowing the students to record the lectures for themselves during class. However, the decision was unclear as to whether recording in class was illegal according to the University.
"I believe it's illegal to record [a lecture as a student]," Schrag said. "It's like how you can't record a concert. However, I have come to understand in the last few days that nothing is for sure, illegal or legal right now."
The idea of selling vocal intellectual property via the Internet is a new idea not only for the University but also for communication technology. Schrag complied with the University's request to remove the Web site because he said he understood his proposal to sell the information is a new and evolving idea.
"I'm not sorry I made the choice and I hope I can get back to giving the information," Schrag said. "However, I don't blame the University for being very cautious."
Be the first to comment on this article!
Log in to be able to post comments.