by DENISE ELAM
Features Editor

(WARRENSBURG, Mo., digitalBURG) — Faculty Senate’s ad hoc committee reviewed the university’s proposed Intellectual Property Policy and presented the draft with changes to faculty at a forum April 19.

Katie Jacobs, president of the Faculty Senate, said faculty were receptive to the proposed changes that included ensuring faculty still own their research and their educational materials.

“I mean there are little things that they thought needed to be changed, maybe make some more definitions and things like that,” Jacobs said.  “We’ve worked really hard with people collaboratively. Faculty were really concerned at first, but as long as people kind of are working with us I think we’re going to come to a great solution overall.”

Jacobs said the biggest changes made to the original proposed Intellectual Property Policy had to do with faculty’s ownership rights.

“If the university wants to own something, we are hoping that they will enter into a written agreement with that creator so that people know upfront who owns what and who’s getting paid what just because it’s fair,” Jacobs said. “Although it looks like we’re changing a lot of things, you have to remember the proposed policy that went out through the vetting process was significantly, drastically different than what we already had.

“When we went in and changed it, we kind of changed it to be more in line with UCM’s culture because once they start saying ‘Hey we’re going to own everything you do,’ people are going to stop doing innovative things because they’re afraid the university’s going to own it.”

General Counsel answered questions about the university’s proposed Intellectual Property Policy at a Q&A session April 12. At the session, several faculty members voiced their concerns with the proposed policy.

“So, as I read through the document, the essence of what’s put in… is if I’ve developed something through my own initiative, whether it’s a classroom material or PowerPoint lecture or the research activities that I need to do as a scholarly activity, if I’ve initiated it, I retain control of that and if in the event of the university augmenting or asking something more from me… if that would happen that’s when I would worry about them having ownership?” said one faculty member at the session.

“Correct, with the one exception of even if it’s your initiative and you’re using it in your course (or) your PowerPoint, all we want to do is say we have a license to retain it in case you leave and we need to show an accreditor that this is what we did,” said Hayley Hansen of General Counsel.

Jacobs released the Faculty Senate ad hoc committee’s recommended changes to the proposed policy April 14, two days after the Q&A session. Jacobs said there are still some things that need to be worked out with the proposed changes to the policy. The policy was brought up at the Faculty Senate meeting April 26.

“We had a motion today to extend our deadline to give feedback on it (the proposed policy) until October,” said Stephen Price, vice president of the Faculty Senate. “But our motions are just recommendations. So, the provost and the president can agree with those recommendations or they can disagree. If they disagree, they send us a written response as to why they are not going to follow our recommendation and all of that goes on file with the university so it’s public record.”

Price said UCM President Chuck Ambrose indicated verbally that he’s OK with pushing the date that the policy will appear to the board of governors back.