Welcome back!
I’d like to continue a discussion that we started last time about electronic textbooks, and digital publications in general, for schools. Monday’s post showed how the arrival of E-books is happening, and within 5-10 years will make-up a large chunk of textbooks sales, and provide an interesting option for schools and students to look at. Additionally, it was pointed out the ease of publishing works via digital means vs standard printers, and how that makes it far easier for new works to get on the market (and at lower costs).
But what about the ethics of E-book use?
As it stands right now, there are some bitter debates on copyright laws between publishers and consumers. My purpose is not to rehash the same arguments that go back to the Napster/MP3 battles, but rather to look at what does that mean for schools and libraries?
I think we can all agree that digital formats offer wonderful potentials for education, but what about the cost associated with them? What about availability? Is it right to encourage students to download copies of books, that they would ordinarily have to pay for, from file sharing sites for free?
It seems illogical that a school or teacher could encourage circumvention of copyright laws, even if they are deemed unfair, and still retain any ability to instill respect and obedience for other laws in their students. Let alone the legality of encouraging that, even by turning a blind eye, by anyone employed in Education.
Obviously, the debate about the ethical obligation of teachers and schools to instill values in students is a rather old, and sometimes tired, debate. But yet it still raises up passions in people, especially as the situation always changes nearly as fast as the calendar flips.
There are those who would argue that students, schools, educators, and people in general should have free access to knowledge and literature. Any attempt to restrict, even if it is by fees and costs, should be resisted.
Still others would claim that c capitalist society is based on commerce. However, where the overheads are minimal, so should be the costs associated with access to the material. Since the product can be found for free, it’s perfectly fine to do whatever it takes to get it.
Another group may claim that since it can’t be policed effectively, that means it is beyond the pale. Until such time as the laws can be applied, it’s a free for all.
Then there are those who feel that even though you may get away with it, and that it may be a ‘small’ breach of the law, it’s still wrong.
All of these points have merits, and all of them make a compelling personal case for our conduct.
The question though, is what code do SCHOOLS have an obligation to follow? Is it up to the individual educator and board to decide? Or should there be a larger ethos that informs this choice?
I understand that this conversation can cut close to the bone for many people. But that often makes for a good discussion, or at least a good couple minutes of private pondering.
I’m going to close with my own opinion, just so that I’m not hiding behind the discussion.
I think schools CANNOT, SHOULD NOT, and MUST NOT fall prey to the allure of using, tacitly approving or encouraging, and in anyway being party to circumvention of copyright laws. We may not agree with the laws as they are written; it may be cheaper and easier to ignore them; and in the end it may even help our pedagogy in the here and now, but what message does it send to our students and the community as a whole? We can’t choose to only uphold the rules that don’t inconvenience us, and we can’t get mired in philosophical debates with ourselves on legality WITHIN our classroom practices. Work to change rules. Speak up against them. Encourage students to do the same. But DO NOT encourage them to, do not lead by example in showing them how to, ignore the rules.
Ryan
I agree with you, Ryan, but earlier in my career, I didn’t. The very first article I ever published (I think it was in 1978 or 79), was entitled something like “Copyright: A Call for Civil Disobedience”. I took a memorable and well-deserved beating from a lot of folks over that moment of indiscretion–and most made the same good points you did here. The only thing that saved me was that it was a small, obscure journal that almost nobody read. Thank goodness it was in the days of conventional publishing and it faded away without following me into the future. Glad it wasn’t an e-pub!
One of the less obvious and not-well-known issues in the ethical use of copyrighted material is the implications of the Bern Convention. The short version of it is that a bunch of signatory countries agreed that if material carries the copyright in one country, it carries the legal protection of whatever country it is being used in when it is being used in a signatory country. So, if something from the USA is protected in Canada under the Canadian Copyright Act. So what?
Well, for example, the USA has a lot of exemptions that allow educators in the USA to make liberal use of copyright materials in their classrooms. Canadian copyright law is much more restrictive. So something created in the USA can’t be used in Canadian classrooms, even though it would be permitted in the USA. And conversely, something created in Canada can’t be used in Canadian classrooms, but can be used in American classrooms.
Complicated. I can understand why the agreement is written this way. Who could keep up with all of the different laws in different countries? But it can be frustrating as an educator caught on the restrictive side of the fence.