Wednesday, June 16, 2010

A draft proposal for IP policy for UC

The University of Canberra has commenced reviewing its Intellectual Property Policy (an official announcement appears not to be happening), and the office in charge of the review has contracted Kevin Croft to make recommendations.

I'm not entirely certain of the procedures of a policy review at UC, as this is the first time I have attempted to engage in one. The second one, the Assessment Policy has been entirely different again! I think it is left up to the officer in charge of the review, as to how it will proceed, and to what extent it will consult with staff. I certainly appreciate the genuine openness from leadership at Otago Polytechnic now.

James Neill, Keith Lyons and myself have been making concerted efforts to engage in this review however, as it is quite critical to the structured support we aim to propose for academics engaging in open academic practices. Currently there is no structured support what-so-ever, in fact the systemic bias is in the other direction to open practices - a discouragement for all staff but the most driven.

Notes on my own attempts to engage the University on this issue are kept here. I'm still not sure how this will play out. I have no idea if the principles we are lobbying to are making it through to UC leadership, or if they are getting a fair hearing of being understood. Based on experience, I take a pessimistic view on these questions.

Here is the draft proposal for an IP Policy at UC. Over the next few weeks we will check in with groups affected to see if they have any concerns or suggestions. This proposed policy takes the progressive elements of Otago Polytechnic's policy further, and sets UC up for being the most progressive research and education institute in Australia. The conference, and consultation around our proposal has engaged Ngunnawal, NTEU, the ACT Islamic community, Parliament, QUT, and several public libraries and museums around Canberra. All have expressed their support for the principles in the proposal, and I hope some will be able to lend a hand in the detail, especially the legal terminology and structure of the proposal.

All this is based on what we think is the right procedure, and to make sure our concerns and proposals go on the record. The support and encouragement we are getting from external groups such as public libraries, museums, politicians and community groups is quite encouraging. We can only hope the response rate will eventually pick up inside UC.


James Neill said...

Thanks for posting about this process, Leigh. I've updated this summary of what is currently known about the intellectual property review process at the University of Canberra.

ellen.hrebeniuk said...

Good luck!