In a message dated 7/3/04 10:49:52 PM, email@example.com writes:
<< We can get to a point where
information that is initially shared with the public (irrespective of
medium - although sharing online has to be the most saturated type of
sharing there is that is open to the largest number of participants),
is meant for use by the public. To create additional obstacles to its
use beyond the recognition of the initial source, seems to be to put
the kibosh on the whole point of using the medium and sharing the
information to begin with. >>
While I technically agree with this, compare a teacher's lesson plans to a
song. It is a teacher's original work and he/she is sharing it in good faith.
However, the music industry has decided that the music is not free...you have
to pay for all of it! So in our case, we share things in good faith and hope
no one will take advantage of our good will. That is how the academic world
has worked for eons. But, I do think it is unfair to say once it goes on the
"internet" or out for public use it is free or fair game not subject the same
rules of other "intellectual property".
I would also say there are folks on this list who do sell their ideas. More
power to them! We have sort of had this debate with regard to someone who
recently wrote a book "borrowing" some ideas from the list. Those folks have
chosen not to share their work but get paid for their original ideas. Of course
we all have the opportunity to do this. I recently got paid to write lessons
for a website that is free to teachers all across the country The best of
both worlds! I got paid to share!
I recently had this debate with someone who put my work on a website (without
my permission) and refused to take it down.
Do we give up all rights because we are generous and share here? I certainly
hope not! I would hope that all researchers, writers, etc. would still be
respectful of the fact that we have chosen to share in an appropriate venue, in
good faith and still treat us with professional respect.
Judy mentioned when doing academic writing you just have to quote (and
document) the source. Well usually in academic writing the best thing is to quote
the ORIGINAL source. In the case of Charlotte, the original source was not IAD
but the listserve. And, while she did not have to ask permission per say, she
did need to be very specific in documenting which quote came from which
person. To use someone's screen name in a footnote would look a little strange! I
think..but then again, that is just me.