APG-L ArchivesArchiver > APG > 2009-08 > 1249957128
From: Ray Beere Johnson II <>
Subject: Re: [APG] teaching and copyright
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 19:18:48 -0700 (PDT)
--- On Mon, 8/10/09, Jackie King <> wrote:
> I really see no difference between a person clicking away with their
> fingers or someone scribbling furiously other than one is electronic
> and one isn't. A person who is good at shorthand can probably take
> better notes than any twitterer and probably will have a more accurate
> verbatim text. So why is Twitter more of a problem than someone with
> a steno notebook?
There are several points here which should be considered more carefully. True, _taking notes_ by electronic means is no different than using a pen and paper - but twittering is a form of _publication_. That does not mean all tweets are bad. But _any_ type of publication is essentially different from a steno notebook - at least until the owner of the notebook typesets their notes and publishes them. :-)
Second, although I would agree that someone practiced in shorthand might be able to take fuller, more accurate notes than the _average_ computer user, shorthand is not the _average_ use of pen and paper, either. Anyone with good software, customised to their needs, and skilled in its use, could leave even shorthand experts in the dust. There are apps which will expand brief codes into words and phrases, for example. Then, of course, anyone using a laptop or netbook might have speech recognition software - or audio capture software - installed.
There is _no_ way to be sure anyone with electronic equipment is not recording the entire lecture. It is just too easy to set things up to run in hidden mode, and to be triggered by a seemingly innocuous keystroke. Does that mean electronic note-taking should be banned? I can't say - that is up to the individual lecturer. But the possibility should at least be mentioned and considered.
This does raise an interesting point, however. The _creator_ of any work automatically acquires copyright rights once it is established in fixed form. Does this mean that if someone recorded a lecture without permission, their placing it in fixed form would confer copyright rights on the lecturer? Or on the "creator" of the pirated copy? How would the law view this? (My gut says the lecturer would retain the copyright rights - but I am not a lawyer.)
> I really have not made up my mind on Twitter. Because of my work I do
> see some very valuable aspects to it. I also see problems - and a lot
> of just plain wastes of time.
This is an excellent assessment of Twitter. It is a tool. A skillful craftsman can accomplish much of value with the same tool another might wreak harm with - and which most users would just waste their time fiddling around with.
_That_ is why _all_ aspects need to be considered and discussed, to work out which uses might have an impact, what that impact might be, and how best to adapt.
Ray Beere Johnson II
|Re: [APG] teaching and copyright by Ray Beere Johnson II <>|