Cross-Cultural Collisions in Cyberspace: Case Studies of International Legal Issues for Educators Working in Globally Networked Learning Environments

Abstract

This article explores some of the legal and law-related challenges educators face in designing, implementing, and sustaining globally networked learning environments (GNLEs) in the context of conflicting international laws on intellectual property and censorship/free speech. By discussing cases and areas involving such legal issues, the article makes visible some of the issues educators may want to consider as they design courses and curricula. First, using the Pakistani–US case of Axact v. Student Network Resources, the author examines issues of authorship and the related issues of copyright law and plagiarism. The author then addresses questions, moral rights, and authorship using the French case of Turner v. Huston. Next, the author explores issues of free speech/censorship and defamation as they have arisen globally in the blogosphere. The author describes several specific instances where such issues have resulted in legal consequences for the digital writer involved. The author then develops a possible solution to some of these legal issues arising in GNLEs by way of the idea of ‘the commons’. In this area of the discussion, the author also examines Creative Commons licensing as well as problems with protecting the appropriation and exploitation of traditional knowledge, and the politics of defining ‘the commons’. The author draws on discussions around the global repatriation debate to inform her exploration in this section. Finally, the article concludes with some recommendations, taking into account the legal and law-related issues of copyright, plagiarism, censorship, defamation, and defining ‘the commons’ as these issues arise in GNLEs.

References

Axact (Pvt.) Ltd. v. Student Network Resources Inc. et al (2007) New Jersey District Court. Case No. 3:2007cv05491. http://dockets.justia.com/docket/court-njdce/case_no-3:2007cv05491/case_id-208337/.

Axact (Pvt.) Ltd. v. Student Network Resources Inc. et al (2008) New Jersey District Court. Case No. 3:2007cv05491. Answer and Counterclaim. http://news.justia.com/cases/featured/new-jersey/njdce/3:2007cv05491/208337/.

Bartlett

(2009) Cheating Goes Global as Essay Mills Multiply, Chronicle of Higher Education, 20 March. http://chronicle.com/free/v55/i28/28a00102.htm

Bayne

(2006) Temptation, Trash and Trust: The authorship and authority of digital texts, E–Learning, 3(1), 16–26. https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.2304/elea.2006.3.1.16

Black's Law Dictionary with Pronunciations (1979) 5th edn. Eagan, MI: West Publishing Co.

Bowrey

(2005) Law and Internet Cultures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. (1994) 510 U.S. 569.

Caruthers

(1998) International Cultural Property: Another tragedy of the commons, Pacific Rim Law and Policy Journal, 7(1), 143–169.

Clouse

(2009) The Repatriation of a Southern Cheyenne Burial and the Contingencies of Authenticity, Journal of Material Culture, 14(2), 169–188. https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1177/1359183509103059

10.

Coombe

R.J.

(1998) The Cultural Life of Intellectual Property: Authorship, appropriation, and the law. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

11.

Deere

(2009) The Implementation Game: The TRIPS agreement and the global politics of intellectual property reform in developing countries. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

12.

DeVoss

D.N.

Porter

J.E.

(2006) Why Napster Matters to Writing: Filesharing as a new ethic of digital delivery, Computers and Composition, 23(2), 178–210. https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1016/j.compcom.2006.02.001

13.

Flessas

(2008) The Repatriation Debate and the Discourse of the Commons, Social and Legal Studies, 17(3), 387–405. https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1177/0964663908093970

14.

Geist

(2009) US Targets Canada over Copyright in Special 301 Report, 30 April. http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/3911/125/.

15.

Gellar

P.E.

(2000) Copyright History and the Future: What's culture got to do with it? Journal of the Copyright Society of the USA, 47, 209–264.

16.

Ghana Copyright Law (2005) Ghana: Copyright, Law, 17/05/2005, No. 690, WIPO Resources. http://www.wipo.int/clea/en/text_pdf.jsp?lang=EN&id=1789

17.

Gross

(2009) Congress to Monitor Canada, Spain for Copyright Violations, PCWorld, 20 May. http://www.pcworld.com/article/165267/congress_to_monitor_canada_spain_for_copyright_violations.html

18.

Hemmer

(2007) When Free Speech Costs a Career, Yale Herald. http://www.campus-watch.org/article/id/2744

19.

Hennig

Tjarks-Sobhani

(Eds) (2004) Technical Communication International: Today and the future, vol. 9. Schriften zur Techische Kommunikation, vol. 8. Lübeck: Schmidt-Romhild.

20.

Holder

J.B.

Flessas

(2008) Emerging Commons, Social and Legal Studies, 17(3), 299–310. https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1177/0964663908093965

21.

Is It Legal? Colleges and Universities, Newsletter on Intellectual Freedom, 56(4), 2007, 160–167.

22.

Katz

(2006) Pitfalls of Open Licensing: An analysis of Creative Commons licensing, IDEA, 46(3), 391–413.

23.

Kwall

R.R.

(1985) Copyright and the Moral Right: Is an American marriage possible? Vanderbilt Law Review, 38(1), 1–69.

24.

Modern Language Association (MLA) (2009) MLA Handbook for Writers of Research Papers, 7th edn. New York: MLA.

25.

Murphy

(2009) Blogger Jailed in Anna Nicole Smith Defamation Suit, Agence France-Presse, 31 May. http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5i8vG0RxY6pgWOUiu_AUqZdVnIAuw

26.

National Public Radio (2009) Outsourcing Homework: ‘custom’ essays for sale, Talk of the Nation, 14 April. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=103095107

27.

Okediji

(2000) Toward an International Fair Use Doctrine, Columbia Journal of Transnational Law, 39, 75–175.

28.

Pakistan Lawyers Blog (2008) Case Study: Global copyright and defamation laws and judgments, 19 November. http://pklawyers.wordpress.com/2008/11/19/case-study-1/.

29.

Reyman

(2008) Rethinking Plagiarism for Technical Communication, Technical Communication, 55(1), 61–67.

30.

Ridolfo

Rife

M.C.

(forthcoming) Rhetorical Velocity and Copyright: A case study on the strategies of rhetorical delivery, in Rife

M.C.

DeVoss

D.N.

Slattery

(Eds) Copy(write): Intellectual property in the writing classroom. West Lafayette, IN: Parlor Press.

31.

Rife

M.C.

(2007a) The Fair Use Doctrine: History, application, implications for (new media) writing teachers, Computers and Composition, 24(2), 154–178. https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1016/j.compcom.2007.02.002

32.

Rife

M.C.

(2007b) Technical Communicators and Digital Writing Risk Assessment, Technical Communication, 54(2), 157–170.

33.

Rife

M.C.

(2008) Rhetorical Invention in Copyright Imbued Environments. Unpublished PhD thesis, Michigan State University.

34.

Rife

M.C.

(2009) Ideas towards a Fair Use Heuristic: Visual rhetoric and composition, in Westbrook

(Ed.) Composition and Copyright, 133–153. New York: State University of New York Press.

35.

Rife

M.C.

(forthcoming) Cyberspace, International Intellectual Property Law, and Rhetoric, in St Amant

Sapienza

(Eds) Culture, Communication, and Cyberspace: Rethinking technical communication for international online environments. Amityville, NY: Baywood.

36.

Rife

M.C.

Hart-Davidson

(2006) Is There a Chilling of Digital Communication? Exploring How Knowledge and Understanding of the Fair Use Doctrine May Influence Web Composing. Pilot study report, SSRN Working Paper Series. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=918822

37.

Salokannel

(2006) Global Justice and Intellectual Property Rights: Reforming the international IPR regime for balanced development, E–Learning, 3(3), 462–472. https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.2304/elea.2006.3.3.462

38.

Selber

S.A.

Johnson-Eilola

(2007) Plagiarism, Originality, Assemblage, Computers and Composition, 24(4), 375–403. https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1016/j.compcom.2007.08.003

39.

Slack

J.D.

Miller

D.J.

Doak

(1993) The Technical Communicator as Author: Meaning, power, authority, Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 7(1), 12–36. https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1177/1050651993007001002

40.

St Amant

(2002) When Cultures and Computers Collide, Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 16(2), 196–214.

41.

Tehrani

(2008) Iran: A long and painful story of jailed bloggers, Global Voices Online, 18 December. http://globalvoicesonline.org/2008/12/18/iran-a-long-and-painful-story-of-jailed-bloggers/.

42.

Turner Entertainment Co. v. Huston, CA Versailles, civ. ch. (1994) Translated in Entertainment Law Reporter, March 1995, at 3.

43.

44.

Vadén

(2006) ‘Intellectual Property’ and Knowledge Creation in Disorganisations, E–Learning, 3(3), 428–433. https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.2304/elea.2006.3.3.428

45.

Viana

L.P.

(2009) US Special 301 Process Acclaimed by Industry, Assailed by Public Interest Groups, Intellectual Property Watch, 2 May. http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/2009/05/02/special-301-process-acclaimed-by-industry-assailed-by-public-interest-groups/.

46.

Yonover

G.J.

(1994) The Precarious Balance: Moral rights, parody, and fair use, Cardozo Arts and Entertainment Law Journal, 14, 79–100.

47.

Zografos

(2006) The Public Interest in the Globally Sustainable Information Society: The traditional knowledge debate, E-Learning, 3(3), 488–493. https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.2304/elea.2006.3.3.488