The University of California at Los Angeles has restored its streaming video service about two months after temporarily suspending the service amid complaints from an educational-media trade group.
The Association for Information and Media Equipment told UCLA in the fall that the university had violated copyright laws by letting instructors use the videos, some of which were full-length productions. UCLA decided that beginning this semester it would suspend the password-protected video-streaming service, available only to students in specific classes.
UCLA announced Wednesday that it will restart streaming of instructional content. The university hopes material will be back up by the spring quarter, which begins March 29. L. Amy Blum, senior campus counsel for UCLA, says the university wants to take steps to ensure that faculty members explicitly say why they are using the copyrighted material.
Current copyright law allows exceptions for research and teaching, including permitting instructors to use audiovisual material in face-to-face courses. The university believes it is protected by those exceptions and the Teach Act, which allows limited use of copyrighted materials for online education.
The information association, or AIME, argues those exclusions do not apply. UCLA and the association had discussions to try to resolve the situation, but the university made the decision to begin using its video-streaming service again independently.
“The message that UCLA sent AIME and all its members is that they and literally every other university have every right to buy a single copy of a video and stream it to an unlimited number of students forever without permission or compensation to the creator,” said the association’s counsel, Arnold P. Lutzker, in a statement to The Chronicle. “Given that message, AIME members will retain their right to move against UCLA and others that we are investigating.”
Mr. Lutzker declined further comment on other institutions the trade group might be investigating.
UCLA spends about $45,000 each year on instructional media and began converting faculty- requested titles to a streamable format in 2005.
Robin L. Garrell, a UCLA chemistry professor and chair of the Academic Senate, said it is too soon to tell if faculty members who use videos will change their syllabi to again include streaming videos. But she said the ability to use streaming videos has been beneficial for students, who might have trouble reaching the university’s media lab at a specific time set to view materials.
“As you can imagine, in Los Angeles, a five-mile commute might be a one-hour commute. So this is really important for our students, so they can manage their time,” Ms. Garrell said.
12 Responses to UCLA Will Resume Streaming Video After Legal Dispute
jschneider11 - March 3, 2010 at 6:13 pm
Very interesting and good for them for exercising what they believe are their fair use rights. I wonder if the Library Copyright Alliance Issue Brief on Streaming of Films for Educational Purposes issued on February 19 figured into their deliberations.Joanne A. SchneiderColgate University
durrellbow - March 3, 2010 at 10:21 pm
I taught an “America in the Sixties” Cluster seminar on film music from 1954-74 at UCLA in the spring of 2008. My twenty or so students needed access to the various films on our syllabus in order to prepare for class discussions, to do assignments, and so on. The university’s Instructional Media Library purchased copies of the films it didn’t already have in its collection (which was only a few of them) and quickly made streaming versions available of all of them for my students.Kudos to UCLA for eventually making all of those films (and many others) available online to the entire UCLA community. I would personally also like to see the university’s music library make all of its streaming music files (tens of thousands of tracks) similarly available.Surely this type of thing is much better than dealing with thousands of students and others downloading things illegally and not even knowing that the university has them in its collections.Durrell Bowman
auplibrary - March 4, 2010 at 6:17 am
One question I have is are the films able to be watched by multiple students at the same time or just one student at a time? Limiting the number of students who can watch a film at one time might be a good compromise. I’ll be watching with interest. In France, at our university, we must buy films with special permissions (to watch in a group, to check out, to watch off the premises) and it costs a bit more to buy the film with more permissions. Keep us informed!Sally Murray
mbelvadi - March 4, 2010 at 7:26 am
I would be interested in what AIME thinks IS covered under the TEACH Act. My guess is that they just don’t like the act, and are trying to discourage institutions from taking advantage of their rights under it. From this article, it sounds like UCLA is absolutely doing what it is entitled to do under that law. They surely have access to the IP lawyers necessary to interpret it properly. Copyright holder organizations (most notably in the entertainment industry) are rather notorious for ignoring the exceptions provided under law to their rights, most notably the entire Fair Use provision, in their public rhetoric about “theft”.
mbelvadi - March 4, 2010 at 7:29 am
auplibrary, that’s also true for libraries in Canada, having to pay a lot extra for “public performance rights”. Many libraries also do so in the US so as to insure a wider set of conditions under which the videos can be used on their campuses. But the US TEACH Act complicates the question as to whether such extra payments are necessary specifically for online class use. But for other campus uses those extra payments are still necessary.
jlaster - March 4, 2010 at 8:52 am
The films can be viewed anytime by students through the UCLA Web site, meaning multiple students can view at once. And many thanks for the information about France/Canada, as well, auplibrary and mbevaldi! Very interesting. -Jill Laster
22097237 - March 4, 2010 at 9:48 am
Jill, I think you mean to say the films can be viewed anytime by students *enrolled in the specific course requiring this content* through the UCLA Web site, right? I’m afraid I’ve seen small imprecisions magnify into large lobbying campaigns in this politicized arena in the past.
mark_notess - March 4, 2010 at 10:00 am
Regarding Durrell’s comment about streaming audio, the open source Variations digital music library system provides a solution with a flexible yet robust access control mechanism, allowing institutions to implement access policies in accord with their own level of legal comfort. We’re hoping to add video capability in the next year or two. For more information, google “variations open source webinar” or contact me.
jlaster - March 4, 2010 at 10:02 am
22097237 – you are absolutely right… As mentioned in the story, these films are viewed only by students enrolled in those courses. -Jill
d_fevens - March 4, 2010 at 10:57 am
Interesting. If the University of Wisconsin had confined their use of digital copies of my work (See my comments re: Universities Add Their Own Search of Google Books to their University of Wisconsin System, then I believe it would be “fair use.” However, they entered a commercial partnership with Google Inc. to obtain their digital copy of my work, thereby violating my (copy)rights.Douglas Fevens,Halifax, Nova ScotiaThe University of Wisconsin, Google, & Me
arrive2__net - March 4, 2010 at 10:49 pm
Intellectual property laws and rules are complex and over time they may change (just when you thought you had “fair use” figured out). You have to keep up-to-date, and consult with experts, to get it right. Profs have to have an idea of what the rules are to optimize their use of media, while respecting the rights of the intellectual property owners. Since many profs are likely to be inellectual property owners themselves, they are likely to be reasonably willing to comply. Bernard SchusterArrive2.net
amnirov - March 5, 2010 at 6:09 am
YAY! Finally a sensible decision from the UC system.