geneviev@southwind.net on fri 10 oct 97
------------------
The Kansas Board of Regents that governs all state funded colleges and
universities, is about to pass an Academic property law, effective in july =
and
granfathered into everyones contract. Basically, any work,weather it be a =
piece
of artwork, book, published article, provided the instructor uses the =
knowledge
area for which they are employed at the university, and get paid for outside
their university contract, is the property of the university. In addition, =
in
the event of the sale of such, will mean the instructor will need to pay =
60=25 of
the sale price, minus materials to the university.
Bottom line here, if I made a sculpture or set of dinnerware, it sold for =
1000,
the university would be entitled to 600, the gallery that sold the work =
would
ask the usual 25-30 =25, so for argument sake, they get 300. The artist =
then will
recieve 100 for all of the blood, sweat and midnight oil.
Please respond what do you all think??? Is this common in other areas or
states????
How do we go about fighting such outragious ideas=21=21=21
I hope all of you that teach will become interested. This is becoming a =
trend
from what I understand. There are a few test cases in Florida now.
Kris
Pat Wehrman on sat 11 oct 97
Perhaps the $ 100 balance would cover the use of equipment and fuel at the
University....
Pat wehrman@goldrush.com
Erin Hayes on sat 11 oct 97
Kris, this law is outrageous! They are acting like the only reason the
faculty member HAS this knowledge area is BECAUSE they are employed at
the school!
Last time I checked, I learned my knowledge area BEFORE I got to the
college I teach at, and any knowledge I have gained since I've been
hired is NOT because I work here but because I want to be a better clay
artist.
Are any of the clay artist/lawyers out there to tell us if this is
legal? I can't believe any other industry would be abused like this.
Does this mean that if a company's employees are welders by trade and
happen to weld for people on the side using their own equipment that
they have to pay the fabrication company they work for!? What a crock!
Someone PLEASE tell us this is NOT legal!
Erin.
Margaret Arial on sat 11 oct 97
wow,
that is outrageous.i even resented instructors having the right to keep any
artwork they wished of their students back in college even allowing them to
publish them in books they would write illustrating them with student work.
i think both practices are unfair and some form of highway robbery it
certainly would have a dampering effect i would bet. hope you win that one
margaret
The Allens on sun 12 oct 97
I'm a lawyer/potter and while I don't practice intellectual property law it
would appear that this statute will run amuck of the due process and =
contract
provisions of the constitution. Off the top of my head, I would think the
University could claim property in works produced on =22company time=22 =
and/or with
university equipment but beyond that I would think not. I doubt that it =
would
be enforceable even if it was placed in the employment contract....I'd be
interested in following the court decisions on this one....
Carla Allen
ridgerun=40scrtc.blue.net
----------
From: Margaret Arial=5BSMTP:ArialMT=40aol.com=5D
Sent: Saturday, October 11, 1997 8:14 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list CLAYART
Subject: Re: Academic Property Laws
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
wow,
that is outrageous.i even resented instructors having the right to keep any
artwork they wished of their students back in college even allowing them to
publish them in books they would write illustrating them with student =
work.
i think both practices are unfair and some form of highway robbery it
certainly would have a dampering effect i would bet. hope you win that one
margaret
Dannon Rhudy on sun 12 oct 97
Erin,
Odds are pretty good that the school(s) are doing this not because
of the art department, but because of other areas of research
where chemists, geneticists, etc., are doing research,
and making lots of money on the results of same. The schools -
just like any other business- want the money for themselves.
Many large research companies have requirements for those working
that all ideas (!), research results, etc., belong to the company,
not to the individual scientist or whomever. Schools/Universities
are jumping on that bandwagon. I expect that they must be all-
inclusive to be able to force their viewpoint.
Sigh.
Dannon Rhudy
potter@koyote.com
----------------------------Original
message----------------------------
.........Are any of the clay artist/lawyers out there to tell us if
this is
legal? I can't believe any other industry would be abused like
this.
.......Someone PLEASE tell us this is NOT legal!.......
Erin.
geneviev@southwind.net on sun 12 oct 97
Wow, then I could make my artwork for free. . . . . Poetic freedom. Of =
course I
would be doing all the work while others made the money, but, who needs to =
eat
anyway. Isn't that why they call them stavring artists sales.
----------
From: Pat Wehrman=5BSMTP:wehrman=40goldrush.com=5D
Sent: Saturday, October 11, 1997 8:04 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list CLAYART
Subject: Re: Academic Property Laws
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
Perhaps the =24 100 balance would cover the use of equipment and fuel at the
University....
Pat wehrman=40goldrush.com
Evan Dresel on mon 13 oct 97
Yes it sucks... but maybe I can suggest a perspective on why the university
is probably doing this. I sincerely doubt they were even thinking of your
pots, or even those high priced ceramic sculptures. The big money is in
software, material science, drugs, and all those high tech widgets which can
be sold by the millions. If someone is doing research at the university and
discovers some major new cure for cancer, say, should the university share
the profits? Afterall it was developed in their facility, using their
graduate students, and they were paying the person to think those lofty
thoughts (ok maybe not paying them well). I have seen enough of professors
spending more time consulting than helping their students.
The catch is that universities don't pay well and the perk of gaining a
little extra income is important in attracting and keeping creative, hard
working faculty. In addition, writing a book or getting your work known
outside the hallowed halls of academia is great publicity for the university
and IMO worth far more to them than the money. I see a disturbing trend in
universities gearing their research to developing commercial products or
proprietary software rather than being the ones who provide the fundamental
ideas and processes which need to be in the public domain to maintain a
progressive, diverse, economy. It's great to be compensated for your
intellectual property but that doesn't help diversify the economy. Can you
see some Paul Soldner patenting post-fire reduction and not letting anyone
else use it without paying royalties?
I expect the University's position is legal. I work for a not-for-profit
which owns my every thought -- even if it has nothing to do with my
knowledge area (and boy can I come up with great ideas on subjects I know
nothing about:-). If I were to start selling pots, I would have to get
permission from the director. Still I think the university is shooting
itself in the foot by discouraging outside activities by its faculty. Their
position needs much more flexibility to be effective.
Evan Dresel in eastern Washington State where the weather is highly variable
and our beautiful river is becomming a pawn in political games.
At 03:26 PM 10-10-97 EDT, you wrote:
>----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>------------------
>The Kansas Board of Regents that governs all state funded colleges and
>universities, is about to pass an Academic property law, effective in july and
>granfathered into everyones contract. Basically, any work,weather it be a
piece
>of artwork, book, published article, provided the instructor uses the knowledge
>area for which they are employed at the university, and get paid for outside
>their university contract, is the property of the university. In addition, in
>the event of the sale of such, will mean the instructor will need to pay
60% of
>the sale price, minus materials to the university.
>
>Bottom line here, if I made a sculpture or set of dinnerware, it sold for 1000,
>the university would be entitled to 600, the gallery that sold the work would
>ask the usual 25-30 %, so for argument sake, they get 300. The artist then
will
>recieve 100 for all of the blood, sweat and midnight oil.
>
>Please respond what do you all think??? Is this common in other areas or
>states????
>
>How do we go about fighting such outragious ideas!!!
>
>I hope all of you that teach will become interested. This is becoming a trend
>from what I understand. There are a few test cases in Florida now.
>
>Kris
>
>
Owen Rye on mon 13 oct 97
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> ------------------
> The Kansas Board of Regents that governs all state funded colleges and
> universities, is about to pass an Academic property law, effective in july and
> granfathered into everyones contract. Basically, any work,weather it be a pie
> of artwork, book, published article, provided the instructor uses the knowledg
> area for which they are employed at the university, and get paid for outside
> their university contract, is the property of the university. In addition, in
> the event of the sale of such, will mean the instructor will need to pay 60%
> the sale price, minus materials to the university.
>
> Bottom line here, if I made a sculpture or set of dinnerware, it sold for 1000
> the university would be entitled to 600, the gallery that sold the work would
> ask the usual 25-30 %, so for argument sake, they get 300. The artist then wi
> recieve 100 for all of the blood, sweat and midnight oil.
>
> Please respond what do you all think??? Is this common in other areas or
> states????
>
> How do we go about fighting such outragious ideas!!!
>
> I hope all of you that teach will become interested. This is becoming a trend
> from what I understand. There are a few test cases in Florida now.
>
> Kris
This issue of intellectual property has not yet fully hotted up in
Australia but that is mainly because like Han Solo, most academic
artists in Australia are 'flying casual' in case it does.
The general interpretation here is that artwork produced in
University time is split; the university owns the 'intellectual
property" but the artist owns the artwork and the income from it.
Some artists take the line that running a fund within the university
into which all proceeds of artwork sales go, but which can only be
accessed by that artist, has tax advantages. I'm not one of them.
The key to this is understanding the term 'intellectual property'.
This does not apply to an object, but to an idea - generally the kind
of ideas which are patentable are the only ones of interest to the
university. So far none of the ideas incorporated in my artwork are
patentable! Once patented a royalty is payable when someone uses the
idea to produce objects, the royalty being paid on the sale of each
object. Most universities here would be willing to negotiate on the
percentage paid to the academic, and the university; hard for them
not to if something critical is held back during the negotiation
stage.........
Like most artists here I run a private business separate from the
university, and pay tax accordingly, and so the taxman has an
interest in whether it is a legitimate business or not and if as a
result I can claim business deductions. The private business is run
out of university hours. The point is, its legitimacy is established
by the taxman who would become distressed if the university tried to
take over.
The suggestion here - and this begins to apply to all aspects of
University employment - is that your contract with them becomes
critical; I would probably see a contract lawyer before signing a
contract, and make sure my side of the contract suits me. Depends on
how keen that particular university is to employ you.......
The situation becomes further fuzzed because in Australia part of the
government funding of universities comes from research publications.
Artist academics count exhibitions as 'publications' so the
university gets funding (but the arist keeps the proceeds of sales).
This gives everyone a cut of the action. I can threaten to not
include any of my 'publications' in the university list if they get
funny about things (quite rightly if the work is produced through my
private business)
As you see it all gets murky and full of contadictions and so I fly
real casual and am wondering at the moment about the wisdom of
pressing the send button here; except the university administrators
(adminis-traitors) are very unlikely to subscribe to Clayart.
I look forward to further development of this discussion; any clues
from other countries?
Owen Rye
Owen.Rye@Arts.Monash.Edu.Au
Robert S. Bruch on mon 13 oct 97
The punishment for invoking such rules probably
will be self enforcing, since a state or university
which employs these rules will find it difficult to
attract top notch faculty assuming that other
institutions do not follow suit.
I would assume that an individual faculty memeber could
negotiate their own contract with the dept or univ that
would exempt them from such rules, and anyone with clout/
talent/ego would either do so or refuse to teach at
that institution.
--
Bob Bruch rsb8@po.cwru.edu
VICTOR JOHNSTON on tue 14 oct 97
I don't know about schools, but it is common in the
manufacturing industry for a prospective employee, especially in
the design or engineering field, to sign an agreement stating that
anything they create or develop, on work time or at home, during
their time of employment (and frequently for a time after) that is in
any way related to their work with the company becomes the
property of the company. Not to sign the agreement means no
job.
I think the reasoning is different, though. With industry, the
employee may come up with an idea that he/she can use to
become a competitor and the person is also exposed to ideas
and thought through his/her work at the company that can
contribute to the new idea or product. The company can
ligitimately claim a "vested interest" in the work of the employee
regardless of when he/she does the work.
Based on what I understand, if an art instructor uses materials
purchased through the institution, uses institution facilities
without some form of agreed paymen (rent) and/or does the
work during time he/she is "on the clock" so to speak, the
institution is able to legally claim rights to the product or at least
part of the procedes. Unless an agreement is established in
advance, the institution can pretty well set the price.
You may well find yourself in the situation of the bronze sculptors
I know. Traditionally the foundry gets 50%, the galery 30% and
the artist 20%. No wonder bronze work costs so much.
Your best bet, if you can't stop the law from passing is to at least
find a way to protect yourself on your private time, then be sure
that you keep your private work totally separate from anything you
do at the school. Hard, I know, sometimes, but may be
necessary.
>>> The Allens 10/12/97 06:31am
>>>
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
I'm a lawyer/potter and while I don't practice intellectual property
law it
would appear that this statute will run amuck of the due process
and contract
provisions of the constitution. Off the top of my head, I would
think the
University could claim property in works produced on "company
time" and/or with
university equipment but beyond that I would think not. I doubt
that it would
be enforceable even if it was placed in the employment
contract....I'd be
interested in following the court decisions on this one....
Carla Allen
ridgerun@scrtc.blue.net
----------
From: Margaret Arial[SMTP:ArialMT@aol.com]
Sent: Saturday, October 11, 1997 8:14 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list CLAYART
Subject: Re: Academic Property Laws
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
wow,
that is outrageous.i even resented instructors having the right to
keep any
artwork they wished of their students back in college even
allowing them to
publish them in books they would write illustrating them with
student work.
i think both practices are unfair and some form of highway
robbery it
certainly would have a dampering effect i would bet. hope you
win that one
margaret
freewill on tue 14 oct 97
Ok, I've got to be missing something; how can you take an idea like "there
is no personal time outside your job" to court?
I've worked as a graphic artist/designer for about 3 years now. I've done
advertising, catalogs, direct mail pieces, spot and cover illustrations,
even oversize pieces of artwork which belong lock, stock and barrel to the
company(ies) I was working for when I created them. I get no royalties and
I have no say about future use of the images. Supposedly, I should
even negotiate with those companies for the right to use those works in my
portfolio. That's all perfectly normal, (though I'm not saying it's
*good*) because I created all that artwork between 9 and 5.
However, any graphic artwork that I may want to do at home "freelance" (as
long as it's not for a competing business), or for an art class or
workshop, or even just for fun on my own, my daytime employer doesn't have
any rights to at all. I've always asked, just to be safe, and I've never
had anyone think any different. All but one or two places even said it was
fine to use office computers after hours to do such artwork. I recognize
that that's very generous. But to think that anyone would say that they
had a right to some profit from what I did at home in the evening? Yikes.
I suppose it could be argued that the artwork that teachers produce is,
like research or publication, something that they do AS PART OF their job.
(That is a requirement for college-level teaching, isn't it?) If that's
true, then you could say that teachers are "on the clock" while they do
their artwork, even if they don't get it done during the 9-5 workday.
That still seems like a far cry from having "no personal time outside your
job". If it comes to pass, I don't see how we'll have any decent
university teachers left at all.
-jenni
jlexau@cwis.unomaha.edu
Erin Hayes on wed 15 oct 97
Hello All!
I have another question to the person who originally posted about the
new Kansas contract proposal, and to the others who have been responding
to it:
If an art faculty member makes work on their own time, with materials
they have purchased, in a studio they own, and fired it in a kiln they
own, with electricity they purchase and glazes they own - what right
does the school they happen to work for have to say they own that
artist's artworks?
I understand bettr how prevalent this sort of thing is, and I can see
perfectly well how people who use school materials or kilns could be
expected to "pay" for that privilege. But I don't see how they could
own my mind and the objects my mind (and hand) produces! It sounds
Orwellian!
Erin. (just a little freaked out about all of this.)
Ric Swenson on wed 15 oct 97
Just a thought on this....
is the concern from business office types.......( dare I use the word
"Beancounter"? ) about costs of "free studio" time and materials that COST
only the University and BENEFIT only the artist...ie they SELL their work. ?
There are two sides to every story and individual campuses handle these
things...or do not.... in varying ways....
Academics that also do studio work and sell it... ( sometimes for big
bucks....) add to the the prestige of the institution for which they
teach....(The old saw.."Publish or perish"...sound familiar anyone?) Is
the artist ...who also draws a salary from a college....entitled to money
from work done while on college property/time/materials/kiln space/etc ?
My opinion is that, without obvious abuse.(..like stealing materials...)
studio artists that teach are doing their best work when they are motivated
by the exposure of the 'real world' market. Practitioners in the arts
deserve to be paid for their teaching and if they are successful in
marketing their skills outside the college venue...and it adds to the
prestige of the institution, then....it is a GOOD idea to promote the
artist/craftsperson and support all their efforts.
Definitions and understandings BEFORE the fact are always a good thing.
Business office people have a hard time with some of this stuff....they
hear rumors of (buzz....buzz...buzz.... how "so and so is making a
fortune selling pottery"... or sculpture or watercolors ...."they made
while using university studios...equipment...materials......."
They ASSUME abuse of the system...they don't see a balance sheet that says
....debit and credit....they just see debits and no money coming in to
cover the "costs of having a faculty member use the college facilities for
personal gain...".......communication might be in order....so that
administrators/faculty and Staff all understand the policies that are in
place....or NEED to be in place....
Enlightened administrators will be able to explain these concepts to the
myopic beancounter types....(.and I use that term in the most respectful
and loving way...) The benefits to the institution are not always in
dollars and cents....but the artist may need to be motivated by
satisfaction in teaching... AND real dollars.
Facts of life.
HTH.
Ric
>----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>
>Ok, I've got to be missing something; how can you take an idea like "there
>is no personal time outside your job" to court?
>
>I've worked as a graphic artist/designer for about 3 years now. I've done
>advertising, catalogs, direct mail pieces, spot and cover illustrations,
>even oversize pieces of artwork which belong lock, stock and barrel to the
>company(ies) I was working for when I created them. I get no royalties and
>I have no say about future use of the images. Supposedly, I should
>even negotiate with those companies for the right to use those works in my
>portfolio. That's all perfectly normal, (though I'm not saying it's
>*good*) because I created all that artwork between 9 and 5.
>
>However, any graphic artwork that I may want to do at home "freelance" (as
>long as it's not for a competing business), or for an art class or
>workshop, or even just for fun on my own, my daytime employer doesn't have
>any rights to at all. I've always asked, just to be safe, and I've never
>had anyone think any different. All but one or two places even said it was
>fine to use office computers after hours to do such artwork. I recognize
>that that's very generous. But to think that anyone would say that they
>had a right to some profit from what I did at home in the evening? Yikes.
>
>I suppose it could be argued that the artwork that teachers produce is,
>like research or publication, something that they do AS PART OF their job.
>(That is a requirement for college-level teaching, isn't it?) If that's
>true, then you could say that teachers are "on the clock" while they do
>their artwork, even if they don't get it done during the 9-5 workday.
>
>That still seems like a far cry from having "no personal time outside your
>job". If it comes to pass, I don't see how we'll have any decent
>university teachers left at all.
>
>
>-jenni
>
>jlexau@cwis.unomaha.edu
#####################################
From: Ric Swenson, ( home ) : P.O. Box 494,
North Bennington, VT 05257 - 0494 U.S.A
( work ) : Bennington College, Route 67 - A,
Bennington, Vermont 05201 - 6001.
( 802 ) 440 - 4621 ( fax 440 - 4582 )
email: rswenson@bennington.edu
#####################################
" If you want to teach a bear to dance,
..... you should be prepared to dance.....
..... until the bear gets tired. "
Hluch - Kevin A. on wed 15 oct 97
Doubtlessly, Alice wished she had never said it. "Don't you think
that the production of art for economic reasons ONLY is a recent
development? That's what I meant by disgusting," she was finally able to
blurt out.
Peering at her intently with contempt in his voice Thomas replied,
"No, I don't find that disgusting in the least. What do YOU find
particularly noxious about acquiring exhorbitant amounts of money for a
teapot?" he asked in return.
Summoning a heretofore hidden inner strength, Alice tried to
argue her point.
"My problem is that it seems that this so-called pottery is
created ONLY for the marketplace, a very narrow one to boot. And that
marketplace, for all intents and purposes, dictates the parameters of
what is acceptable or not. It doesn't have much to
do with functionalism, it doesn't have much to do with the society at
large, and it certainly doesn't have much to do with beauty," she whined.
Thomas Coinhead, Director of the Board of the Smothersonian's
Wenrick Gallery and President of the Avant Garde Potters Guild had dealt
with pinheads like her before. His ability to talk rings around the
mental midgets who passed for Representatives in Congress was renowned among the
more rarefied art circles in which he had insinuated himself. How else did the
Arts Progress Administration get funded year after year?
"My sweet dear, if it weren't for the likes of me and my rather
significant inputs and impacts on the crafts field YOU might be just
another typical computer operator with typical skills earning perfectly average
wages and doing your pitiful pottery on the side. It is a result of the
harnessing of the educational system that turned craft into ART, that is:
capital A,capital R, capital T. It is precisely your haughty moral superiority
in the face of profit that betrays you", Thomas proferred.
"Even university professors must now pay to their institutions
royalties for the work they produce. What kind of ivory tower did they
think THEY lived in. Our system is CAPITALISM. And, by God, and it's
about time those something for nothing professors got out of the wagon and
started pulling. Who's idea do you think was that?" he queried.
"Well, I didn't...." Alice attempted to answer but was cut off.
"If I had my way even those lazy, pierced and profane art
students would be selling their studio work to support the university.
They are exploiting state subsidized spaces and equipment too!...Where do
THEY get off?" Thomas asked of no one in particular now and was
compelled to continue his pompous bombast.
"It has been MY ability to influence a cadre of like minds, with
the specific goal of raising the price points of the various mundane crafts
that has produced a market place where you've got to spend real money, and
that's M O N E Y, to buy even loathsome cups like your own. I did not
spend three-quarters of my life laboring in crafts to see a bunch of aging
hippies become dependent upon the government during the wrinkled butt stage of
heir lives. Certainly this particular group has sucked at the teat of our
sweet capitalist system long enough" Thomas frothed.
Hesitatingly and with simmering disgust Alice could only reply,
"Well, I guess you get what you pay for."
Gazing at her body lasciviously he replied with a crooked,
leering smile wiped broadly on his face, "Precisely, my dear, precisely."
Kevin A. Hluch
102 E. 8th St.
Frederick, MD 21701
USA
e-mail: kahluch@umd5.umd.edu
http://www.erols.com/mhluch/mudslinger.html
On Tue, 14 Oct 1997, VICTOR JOHNSTON wrote:
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> I don't know about schools, but it is common in the
> manufacturing industry for a prospective employee, especially in
> the design or engineering field, to sign an agreement stating that
> anything they create or develop, on work time or at home, during
> their time of employment (and frequently for a time after) that is in
> any way related to their work with the company becomes the
> property of the company. Not to sign the agreement means no
> job.
>
> I think the reasoning is different, though. With industry, the
> employee may come up with an idea that he/she can use to
> become a competitor and the person is also exposed to ideas
> and thought through his/her work at the company that can
> contribute to the new idea or product. The company can
> ligitimately claim a "vested interest" in the work of the employee
> regardless of when he/she does the work.
>
> Based on what I understand, if an art instructor uses materials
> purchased through the institution, uses institution facilities
> without some form of agreed paymen (rent) and/or does the
> work during time he/she is "on the clock" so to speak, the
> institution is able to legally claim rights to the product or at least
> part of the procedes. Unless an agreement is established in
> advance, the institution can pretty well set the price.
>
> You may well find yourself in the situation of the bronze sculptors
> I know. Traditionally the foundry gets 50%, the galery 30% and
> the artist 20%. No wonder bronze work costs so much.
>
> Your best bet, if you can't stop the law from passing is to at least
> find a way to protect yourself on your private time, then be sure
> that you keep your private work totally separate from anything you
> do at the school. Hard, I know, sometimes, but may be
> necessary.
>
> >>> The Allens 10/12/97 06:31am
> >>>
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> I'm a lawyer/potter and while I don't practice intellectual property
> law it
> would appear that this statute will run amuck of the due process
> and contract
> provisions of the constitution. Off the top of my head, I would
> think the
> University could claim property in works produced on "company
> time" and/or with
> university equipment but beyond that I would think not. I doubt
> that it would
> be enforceable even if it was placed in the employment
> contract....I'd be
> interested in following the court decisions on this one....
> Carla Allen
> ridgerun@scrtc.blue.net
>
> ----------
> From: Margaret Arial[SMTP:ArialMT@aol.com]
> Sent: Saturday, October 11, 1997 8:14 AM
> To: Multiple recipients of list CLAYART
> Subject: Re: Academic Property Laws
>
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> wow,
> that is outrageous.i even resented instructors having the right to
> keep any
> artwork they wished of their students back in college even
> allowing them to
> publish them in books they would write illustrating them with
> student work.
> i think both practices are unfair and some form of highway
> robbery it
> certainly would have a dampering effect i would bet. hope you
> win that one
> margaret
>
Ernesto Burciaga on fri 17 oct 97
If it is a condition of employment? Many larger companys have similar
type of arrangements. I'm working in a non art field and an art book
that I write is the companys.
Ernesto Burciaga
eburciag@rt66.com
geneviev@southwind.net on fri 17 oct 97
------------------
Erin, I believe, the proposal was brought up with science, computers and =
heavy
research areas in mind, more than the arts. There is a lot more money =
involved
when you are talking about projects such as an aids research, encompasing =
many
hours of volunteer time, graduate assistants, university equipment, =
facilities,
millions of dollars in grants,and university recognition etc. Those who =
sell a
potentially helpful drug, treatment or cure stand to make a sizable income. =
As
well as becoming world famous. The university simply wants its share of the
wealth and recognition. In such an example, where the university personnel,
equipment, facilities etc are utilized this request seems reasonable.
Unfortunately, with a blanket proposal intended to cover all faculty, all =
state
institutions regardless of size or purpose, and all situations, it is =
destined
to be more fair to some than for others. That is life. I believe a simple
blanket proposal will not address what the committee hopes and will only =
serve
to alianate and distance the faculty, rather than rally their support for =
the
institution in which they work. Many more =22small time opperators=22 will =
be hurt
by such a proposal. The board of regents must weigh weather the few =22big =
fish=22
they will catch in this net, will be worth the cost. Unfortunately, they =
may
not know that answer, or be able to predict an answer for several years =
after
implementation. Too much of the equation is up to chance, the motivation of=
the
researchers, time and dollars spent and ultimately luck.
This is just how I see it and my humble opinion . . .. . and we all know =
what
they say about opinions.
I am however the one who first posted this concern. It is truely happening =
here
in Kansas. If anyone has any suggestions on ways to fight such an action, I
would be very interested. This is larger than one institution, larger than =
a
few administrators. We are talking all of the state regent schools would =
fall
under this proposal.
Thanks for your comments.
Kris
----------
From: Erin Hayes=5BSMTP:ehayes=40ctc.ctc.edu=5D
Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 1997 7:29 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list CLAYART
Subject: Re: Academic Property Laws -Reply
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
Hello All=21
I have another question to the person who originally posted about the
new Kansas contract proposal, and to the others who have been responding
to it:
If an art faculty member makes work on their own time, with materials
they have purchased, in a studio they own, and fired it in a kiln they
own, with electricity they purchase and glazes they own - what right
does the school they happen to work for have to say they own that
artist's artworks?
I understand bettr how prevalent this sort of thing is, and I can see
perfectly well how people who use school materials or kilns could be
expected to =22pay=22 for that privilege. But I don't see how they could
own my mind and the objects my mind (and hand) produces=21 It sounds
Orwellian=21
Erin. (just a little freaked out about all of this.)
Rick Sherman on sun 19 oct 97
----------------------------cut of final paragraph--------------------
....I am however the one who first posted this concern. It is truely
happening here in Kansas. If anyone has any suggestions on ways to
fight such an action, I would be very interested. This is larger than
one institution, larger than a few administrators. We are talking all
of the state regent schools would fall under this proposal.
Thanks for your comments.
Kris
--------------------------Comment-------------------------------------
My wife worked for Batelle in Ohio. The rule was that any invention or
patent done that the research institution was the property of the
company. The applied even after the person retired from the institution
if the invention or patent related to research conducted at the
company. Organizations such as this are in business. The supposed
business of colleges and universities is education not making profit
from research. However, there are major exceptions as in the case of
reasearch, some contracted, in medicine, technology, engineering and
other hard sciences. Professors are hired to conduct research and
their students join them in the process. Consider the recent Nobel
Prize winners. Income in the form of grants as well as reputation is
earned by big universities conducting research.
The college or university has to draw the differentiation between this
form of research and the professor who writes a book, gives a lecture
or produces a work of art. The Associate Head of a local university
art department has just completed a major sculpture for a community
college. He has over a dozen of these he has produced the past decade
for the airport, public buildings and corporations. All work was
created in his own studio on his own time. How many of you know a
professor who wrote a book? Mine wrote three. Does Susan Peterson owe
her university a percent of her royalties? Reputation is achieved
through texts, speeches, workshops, cosultations and exhibitions, not
only for the professor but for the employer. Much of the knowledge and
skill were aquired prior to joining the institution. That should be
taken into account. Thank our stars this Kansas rule has not emerged in
California. I suggest those affected by this ruling form a phalanx
start negotiating now. It also might provide a good court case. How
much of you is owned by the university?
RS
San Jose, CA
Evan Dresel on sun 19 oct 97
Of course this brings up another option -- a faculty union. A little
collective barganing could go a long way.
-- Evan who sees many negatives and positives in the above suggestion.
At 10:29 AM 10-17-97 EDT, you wrote:
>----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>If it is a condition of employment? Many larger companys have similar
>type of arrangements. I'm working in a non art field and an art book
>that I write is the companys.
>
>Ernesto Burciaga
>eburciag@rt66.com
>
>
| |
|
