Do you share?

I tend to agree with LE on this. If you write a research paper or anything along those lines, this is also owned by the school you work for - even in western countries. It is part of being an academic or working in academia. Even though we may have low opinions of many of our chinese universities and the way they do things they do own our lessons as well.
The problem I have is sharing my ppt with the chinese teachers because they tend to deliver the lesson verbatim off of the powerpoint and mine tend to be very brief with verbal explanations and if they do not know the material well enough there is no way they can deliver the lesson properly. This would cause problems down the road - and also make me look bad when they say that it was my lesson they were using.
I simply tell the teachers that they need to go to the internet and do a search - you can find almost anything covered there and find the one that works best for themselves.

I have no problem giving a CHINESE English teacher copies of my lesson plans and/or letting them watch my class.  I am a native speaker after all and they won't be replacing me.

IP is bullcrap, no company owns my ideas or my original work unless I am contracted to specifically deliver such. To me this means "will deliver copies of lesson plans before/after class to a company representative or teacher at work location".  My contract states no such thing.

I share for the same reason as Decurso.

The US Supreme court has upheld that this year LE.  If I develop my own English teaching manual for example my employer has no rights to my work AT ALL even if I developed it while employed there. 

If you write a research paper or anything along those lines, this is also owned by the school you work for - even in western countries.

This is also in court. A large group of students is suing a few universities and the plagiarism checking websites for copyright infringement.

A quick web search suggests academic institutions--like Notre Dame, for example--claim ownership of educational materials produced by employees only (all sorts of pleasantly vague caveats aside) when the materials are understood in law as works made for hire--that is, you were hired explicitly to make materials; or when substantial use of institution resources was made in the development process, and then they only claim ownership of the tangible works (for example, I sincerely doubt but better say, a ppt if it was put together using university-provided resources).

Nor in general do institutions claim ownership of scholarly work. 

And their legal teams undoubtedly have already well-defined ways to deny such policies and extinguish the happy fiction of individual IP if it was in the university's commercial interest to do so.  But when it's not, then usually they don't.

Normal western IP conventions are about patentable inventions.  The convention is that it's owned by the employer.  And normal western case law says sometimes it's owned by the employee.

Lotus, you've been giving up moral rights you didn't even know you had.

IMHO...

IF, when you read and signed your contract, it stated "Must provide lesson plans to the Administrator/Head Teacher", then you should provide the same, with notes attached as to what resources are used in developing the lesson.  The resources, the copies of materials used and your own working reference papers belong to YOU.

HOWEVER, if you are asked to teach or give instruction on a part-time, limited engagement, then anything you use belongs to YOU.  You may share (or not) as you see fit.  

Remember, They need you more than you need Them.  If demands are made which you are not happy with, you can always walk......or at least threaten to walk.  Respectful requests are another matter, mind you.

when the materials are understood in law as works made for hire--that is you were hired explicitly to make materials; or when substantial use of institution resources was made in the development process, and then they only claim ownership of the tangible works

Exactly. If I pull my lesson plan out of Sun Wukong's butt and it works great then it's mine mine mine mine, all mine!!!!!

But I'll let decurso have a copy of course...

No-one has ever asked me for my resources, so all I actually do is give a brief outline of the work I covered in  semester - a very short lesson plan.

However I thought this was interesting from the Tasmanian Ed Dept.

a) Clarifying copyright ownership for staff, students and volunteers.
Copyright ownership of work undertaken by employees

    * Copyright ownership in all work created for work related purposes by employees during the course of employment with the Department of Education resides with the State of Tasmania.
    * Employees, including teachers, creating intellectual property outside their normal working hours but which could be considered part of their work, are strongly advised to seek prior acknowledgement of IP ownership if they wish to independently pursue ownership rights.
    * An employee creating intellectual property outside their normal working hours but which cannot be linked with their work retains all copyright.

And in Ruth's particular case

Copyright ownership by consultants, contractors or relief staff

    * All contractors or consultants engaged by the Department for a fixed period or a specific area of work must be covered by a standard contract for services or consultancy contract. Under these standard contracts, the default stance is that copyright ownership resides with the State of Tasmania, but this stance is negotiable.

But as has been acknowledged several times (including by me) - delivery of the material is not able to be transferred.  The same materials used by different teachers will not have the same impact.


But clearly in a different professional world IP is important - whether we want to think so or not.

"In an employment situation, any work produced is owned by the employer, even if you're a consultant who creates software," confirms Michael J. Martin, executive vice president of Virginia Tech Intellectual Properties (VTIP), Inc., in Blacksburg, Va.

They may not understand that the act of creating is an important legal process with value separate and distinct from the product itself. ... "When you start a job, they're not hiring you to dig a ditch, but to think," he says. "They are hiring you for your capacity to produce intellectual property which will add value to the firm."

A few important points to consider in IP / Copyright law in determining who has the rights to the teaching materials are:

1. Are you a full-time employee (University ESL teachers?) or a contractor/part-timer.

2. Does your contract specifically state that developing course material is part of your work related duties.

3. Could the material be used for a commercial purpose (which means the sale of the material - not the tuition from students)

4. Is the material "original"

5. Is the material "work product" (created in the process of fulfilling your duties)

5. Did the employer provide resources to assist in the development of the material (paid work time, research material, content, printing, etc)

... to name just a few.

Every situation needs to be assessed on a "case-by-case" basis.

The most likely scenario in which the employer could reasonably expect sole or part ownership of the IP rights to general ESL lesson aids is when it specifically states in the contract that the teachers duties involve curriculum/material development - for example, being asked to develop and teach a new university subject AND being provided with the resources to do so.

Otherwise, for most (non-university) ESL teachers, if you've prepared something on your time, with your own resources and as a result of your own intellectual activities - then it's yours.  Share as you deem fit.

Who owns yours? A good article on the subject here:

http://www.aaup.org/AAUP/pubsres/academe/2002/SO/Feat/Smit.htm?PF=1

[attachment removed for space reason by admin]

I ran into a similar situation but in a different business. I'm still in the States and used to work as a supervisor for a desktop publishing business. I developed several standard forms and templates that a lot of my customers use to speed up the process for myself and my staff. When I left the company,they tried to tell me that I had to give them these programs as I'd deleated them from their computer as my personal stuff.
It became a huge deal,so I talked to a friend of mine who is a lawyer. The ruling was,if I used their equipment to create the items or created them while on the clock,they had a right to them but if I used my own equipment and did not create them while at work then they were mine and the company had no claim to any of it. Once presented to the company they backed off real quick,also I told them I'd sue them for theft of my personal property if they didn't.(that's what my lawyer friend told me to tell them)

There is much to be said for figuring out how to develop documents that obey the letter of the rules and look damned impressive, but don't actually contain a damned thing that could actually be used in a classroom etc. without you there to supply the missing pieces...which reside only in your head.

Last semester I shared my lessons with some of my Chinese colleagues - and this semester I realised that one of them had done the class I had planned for the 8th with my class at his last lesson.  He said it worked really well!  We share the class - he has them for writing, I have them for Oral. I now have do something else with what he has already done or create a new lesson.

I would have chosen a different smilie, Lotus.  I'd feel more like this    if another teacher used MY lesson for a class I was planning to teach it to.  I think that's my biggest beef with sharing in the middle school situation:  I'll get there next Christmas in a pinch-hit situation like this year, grab my standard lesson-to-go, and the students will say, "Oh, we know that already.  Ms. Li taught us that yesterday."

LE, Is he singing in the soprano section of the choir now??

Interesting thoughts from so many people.
Having worked in software for most of my working years,
I've had a bit of exposure to IP concepts and laws.

There are currently many debates going on in the world about
similar concepts and 'the jury is out' on most of them in my opinion.

The Tasmania example is interesting to note, I agree. It must be remembered
that a lawyer wrote that for the institution. If it were written by the
creative contributor, it would have been written from an opposite viewpoint.

The world's creative property is generally controlled by greed, power and manipulation.
Look at the music industry. Also, look at the Movie industry.

Why do I mention this? Power, greed, legal tricks, lawyers and manipulation are the norm and are how things are done in general. I wouldn't use ANY of them as any more than background information when it comes to making a moral/ethical decision.

The truly key factor here is how you feel. This product is something you created.
You own what you create forever in the most basic terms. No one can copy you - not yet anyway. So, you are obviously the most valuable part of the equation and that is safe.

When it comes to China's regard for copyright and IP as well as fair compensation or desiring to see a foreigner do well... we know how that goes 99% of the time.

It seems you want some recognition. I was teaching in Thailand a few years ago and I
used to get the class yelling (inspired in part by Li Yang's work). After a few weeks, all the English teachers were using that technique in their classes. I was flattered and happy that they took my idea and it benefited them. I would never recommend holding back something that will truly benefit others based upon your own vanity. I would have liked to have heard 'hey, we're using your idea and its working'. Oh well.

I was teaching in Beijing several years ago in the 'Business English' circuit when I heard about some American guy that had some cool technique for teaching business English. He wouldn't share it with me nor would one of his teachers. He quit teaching He left China. So did his idea. Now no one can benefit. My point is this; being too greedy doesn't give you a chance to help others.

There is a more creative approach. You've created some Ppt lessons that you are obviously proud of and value. You should package them in a way that you can sell them. You're a teacher by trade. I'm not asking you to bake me a cake as a gift here. Someone has walked into your bakery and asked for your recipe and one of your cakes for nothing in return. A creative and fair answer may be: If you like my cake, I'll make a special package for you. (sorry for the sloppy example) In my opinion, this is not a legal question or one of manners. It is a challenge to you to effectively and ethically take advantage of the value you bring to this earth.

Now I'm curious about your lessons...

Umm .. no, I actually took it as a compliment that he thought it was a good enough idea to use!  He used it for a writing class, so I figure I can still use it for Oral - this time they need to present it either in a team or individually to the class.  They will have practiced the vocab by writing it out first and will have heard others ideas so may improve on their own.

He's also a nice guy - young, handsome, newly married.  He and his wife have invited me for dinner a few times - so it would be hard to ruin their marriage right at this stage.