 The recording's just begun. Good afternoon everybody. Hello, good morning, good afternoon. Good morning, good afternoon. Yes, depending on where you are. So I'm Chris Morrison. And I'm Jane Secker. And welcome to the 38th webinar in this series, which we retied the last time copyright and online learning at a time of uncertainty. We believe that we've passed the moment of crisis, but it's still uncertain. So that's why we are continuing these sessions. And today's is one we're very excited about, isn't it? Absolutely, yes. Yeah, we've got a fantastic line up of speakers. You probably noticed it's not 11am in the UK. It's 2pm and that was to accommodate our US and Canadian guests who are joining us. So, yeah, we will introduce them in a short while, but we are recording the session for people who aren't able to make it because we had a lot of interest in today's session. So, Chris, tell us, tell us what we're going to get up to today. Well, we've got a few items of copyright news and we'll try to go through those as quickly as possible to get on to the main event looking at codes of best practices in fair use in open educational resources and we've got a really great response as well from Bart and Steph who are working on a European project which incorporates many of the same elements of the work that the codes have put in place. So, let's move on just to a quick one about what we've been up to this week we would like to check in. So, it's been lovely and sunny in the UK and I hope everyone else has been out able to get some of the sunshine. So, a couple of photos from our respective breaks. I managed to get up north so that picture on the left is a picture I took while out running where my uncle lives. It's beautiful up there. It's amazing. It's tough running but it's brilliant. It's Manchester you said you can see right in the far distance you can see Manchester in the far distance. It was, it's Whitworth near Rochdale lovely place and you've been making the best of the sunshine as well. I have, I have. Yes, I've been on the sunny Kent coast just down the road and this is my lovely nephew Henry who I took to Margate for a great day out. Actually Dreamland was only open for drinks and he was very disappointed he couldn't go on that big wheel and so the most exciting thing was this sort of quite old retro rocket which didn't go anywhere and he kept saying why can't I go on any rides? So, anyway, it was a lot of fun a lot of fun and nice weather. So, good week, yes. Good to have time off as well We're back, here we are, here we are, yes and we're on the case. Right, so this is a reminder that all the previous webinars can be found on the copyright literacy.org blog and the last one, if you haven't seen that, it's worth catching up on as well because we had excellent presentation from the Open Education Special Interest Group of ALT and Theresa and really great discussions around open education more broadly that really sets the scene for today's one. Absolutely, yes. So, let's get on to Copyright News, Copyright So, what's in the Copyright News today? We've got a bit of an update, haven't we, on the Copyright and Online Learning Special Interest Group? Yes, we have. We actually had our second committee meeting this week on Tuesday of the committee and we've got lots of exciting things planned, lots of things up our sleeve, talking about some future events and some of the areas that we're working on related to copyright and accessibility about codes of fair use and fair practice. So, yes, lots of great stuff but the key thing is our newsletter is going to be going out next week if you're not a member then Chris will pop the link in or has popped the link in to the website so you can sign up there and you'll find out lots more from the group. So, it's free to join so just to let you know and we'll be kind of telling people what we're doing in these webinars but the best way to keep in touch is to actually join the group. And if you're wondering what kind of person would become a member of the Copyright and Online Learning Special Interest Group well we have an example here of this is exactly the kind of person sporting one of the new very exciting t-shirts which is part of a range of merchandise that you can get it's part of the Association of Learning Technologies shop so you might want to think about getting a t-shirt as well if that's the thing you're into. There's some other exciting products on there. There's a bag, there's an apron there's all sorts of things. There is. We haven't managed to get hold of t-shirts yet you know how much we love t-shirts but anyway, if you want to get in there first they're on order Chris. Or I would say Greg Walter who's been instrumental in designing our logo has already I think got himself a t-shirt he's looking very smart in it. Other things we also have the recording from the most recent Create Public lecture which was from Emily Hudson who's a regular contributor to these webinars talking about her book Drafting Copyright Exceptions and also thinking about Brexit so that's a really good, that was a really great session if you want to pick up on that recording then let's put the link in that there. Yeah and the blog post is a really good summary of the event actually as well so it's worth taking a look at that so yeah. However that's not the last opportunity you get to catch Emily Hudson live in concert there's a really good session coming up there's an event coming up next week in which oh look there we are we're right at the top talking about Corsig talking about communities. But also Emily will be talking there again about Copyright Exceptions, Drafting Copyright Exceptions we've also got the brilliant Hannah Pyman talking about Copyright Doe her game and John Kelly from JISC talking about accessibility regulations so I'm sure that's going to be an interest to people here and we're very much looking forward to that event. Yeah absolutely absolutely yeah yeah But that's not the only event is it? No there's one more I think there is a very very exciting event happening two weeks today I can't believe it's not Ice Pops because it's not Ice Pops it's online so our popular international copyright literacy event with playful opportunities for practitioners and scholars is back and it's going to be online. If you haven't yet got your ticket then hurry hurry because they are literally selling like what did you call it cold glollies cold ice ice pops. I think I said ice pops didn't they? Yes we had a bit of a question for anyway but the other really exciting thing is that the program is now up so I'm just going to pop the program the link in the chat we haven't yet got a blog post about this but we're about to start tweeting about the program so if you're still I'm in an hour in about whether you want to come along there's the link to the draft program that is now up and there'll be a fantastic range of speakers at that event and there will be lightning talks and a world cafe in the morning and in the afternoon and there's going to be karaoke in the evening so it's going to be amazing it is going to be very good. You've been having singing lessons deliberately haven't you Chris so that you can storm that karaoke. I don't want to reveal too much about what happens in the background ok right then I think it's time to move on to our featured presentation this week absolutely yes as we said we're absolutely delighted to welcome the team that is behind this best practices in fair use for open educational resources code so we have Will Cross Professor Peter Yazi Jacob Pru Adler and Charis Craig so we're welcoming Charis back who's been on a previous webinar with us but we tuned in to their presentation a few weeks back that we spoke about and we've been in touch with them because it links very much to work that we're doing and wanting to pick up here in the UK and certainly we've been following Peter and his work and the numerous codes that have been created over the years and the work he's done with Patricia Alfterheider that's been a real inspiration to us trying to work through how do you actually take the law and how do you provide communities or work with communities to work out how you do things in practice so I think without further ado we're going to hand over to the team they're going to do a joint presentation I'm really looking forward to it so thank you very much for joining us today and shall I get this light up or are you ready to make a good point yes so just bear with us I think and thanks Meredith for putting the link to the previous codes in there we're good you're okay good excellent thank you very much the only other thing we will be having a response after this from Stefan Kompel and Bart Milletti but over to you Meredith you're going to pick this one up are you? I am thank you and thank you everybody for taking the time to join us today having said that maybe I think I'll start by talking about why I think it might be useful to hear an hour about fair use even if it's not currently available where you're working the first thing I hope to say I hope to explain is why I think when you're creating particularly when you're creating open educational resources that you need to rely on whatever limitations and exceptions exist in your copyright system to bolster what is available under the public domain and what is available under Creative Commons licenses that it's really impossible to fully meet your teaching mission and to meet your obligations to equal access for all your students if you don't take advantage of the limitations and exceptions in your copyright law. Having said that then I hope my colleague will we'll talk a little bit about why in fact the way that we think about different types of uses in this code of best practices really line up more with shared pedagogical purposes that are going to be the same cross-border and then finally we'll hear from Charis and Peter about how the legal freedoms that we're talking about in this code are not unique to US law or to fair use and are permitted in large part by fair dealing and by quotation law in other jurisdictions and importantly that where sort of at the margins they are not permitted that it's important to make the case and to make the demand that the law needs to accommodate these core teaching practices these core societal goals not the other way around that our teaching should not be tailored to the copyright law that the copyright law should be tailored to our teaching needs. So having said that we're going to dive in. So in the first section of the presentation what we want to talk about is why despite the sort of easy appeal of saying just use openly licensed or public domain materials that often doesn't fulfill the full pedagogical goals of what we are public domain works are clearly a core foundation that can be used but because there are limited to certain types of works that are either out of copyright or types of information or content that aren't protected by copyright there's this core set of modern materials materials created in roughly the last 100 years that are absolutely essential to learning and to discourse that are not generally going to be available in the public domain. The second big bucket of materials that OER creators often rely on are CC licensed materials and those materials are very valuable and crucially are available to be used without any sort of discussion of purpose or context in large part. And so I think it's very easy for OER creators to seek the sort of perceived safety of using only materials in the public domain or CC licensed materials but in fact one of the core reasons that we have limitations and exceptions to copyright law is because we understand that you need to engage with existing third party content to teach about it and to teach about the world and so for that reason we make the argument that it is in fact necessary to understand and rely on fair use and other limitations and exceptions when you're creating copyrighted materials. And here I would also emphasize that almost all OER creators already do to some degree. You know there are very few of any OER creators who completely avoid using even short quotes. And similarly all OER creators rely on sort of fundamental ideas like the idea expression distinction, right? They reference and rely on ideas and content that is written before. So this reality that you need to understand and rely on limitations and exceptions is already sort of built in and we just want to sort of encourage people to take that one step further and understand when and how the law is designed to allow them to incorporate and use third party content. Earlier we are efforts often focused on STEM education on science and math and I think that that created perhaps a incomplete impression that it was possible to sort of treat OERs if it were a closed book test to sit in a room and recreate stuff and start from scratch even if that was really costly or sort of a waste of time but that you could do it. And perhaps that's true in certain, you know, maybe you could sit down and from scratch write an algebra textbook. But for most things when you're teaching about history or art or political science you really do need to rely on outside materials in some part and the question is when and how can you incorporate those directly into the OER materials. The other thing I will say I think which was made particularly stark during the last year and a half was what cost is there to not doing that. One of the things that we see very often is OER creators and teachers looking at linking out as a substitute to digging in about fair use or digging in about other limitations and exceptions and I think one of the most worrisome things about that is that it puts the burden of that unreliability of linking out about whether those linked materials are in an appropriate context whether they are accessible whether someone who has low bandwidth can reliably access them. It takes all of those problems and it shifts it onto students who are already the students that are marginalized in the educational system and so to the extent that in addition to the pedagogical goals of educational materials we also have a commitment to meeting the equal access needs of all of our students on a level playing field that digging into limitations and exceptions and actually finding materials and incorporating them directly into the OERs is important to meet that goal. So as Chris mentioned in the introduction this best practices is one of many that looks at how to take the legal foundation of fair use and implement it in a creative or professional community and as you all know fair use is a four factor test but it's really condensed down to two core questions which is are you doing something new or different? Something transformative with the material that you're using and is the amount you're using, whether apart or in many cases the whole appropriate to that purpose? So, you know, if a newspaper front page was originally used for its news purpose and now you're using it for a historical purpose, that's your transformative purpose and then the question is are you using the amount of the page that's appropriate to give your students that context? That's an example. And if the answer to both of those questions is yes it's very unlikely you're providing a substitute for that copyright in its original market which is the sort of pocketbook issue that's relevant to fair use. I'll add that actually since we first drafted this slide there's another question that's been sort of hinted at. In the Google View Oracle case the opinion discussed also in finding for Google the sort of strong public benefit to this use and I think while it's sort of unclear how that's going to out in the long run is part of the fair use analysis the OER community is well suited to explain how their use is aligned both with the underpinnings, uplimitations and exceptions in the copyright system and also with the public benefit intended through education and public debate. So, these codes of best practices are part of a series of works that have looked at communities who rely on fair use to meet their professional or creative mission and then understand how certain repeated professional practices can be understood at a more concrete level than having to sort of sit down with those two fair use questions each time you want to make a use. So the process of these best practices is working with creative communities and understanding sort of what the repeated scenarios are and how to think through those two broad fair use questions in the context of repeated scenarios that come up for those communities. And in this best practices specifically we knew that it was impossible to say we're creating a best practices in fair use for all of the education sector that while laudable is not a goal that we could have met this year or not. So we focused on a more narrow question which was when and how does fair use allow you to take materials and insert them into OER. And so we're talking here about specifically taking some or all of a third party material and inserting it into a sort of packaged open educational resource and that could be a textbook or a textbook substitute, that could be a set of student exercises, it could be a video it could be any type of object, it doesn't need to be just a textbook but we are talking specifically about that inserting in. And we hope that this will allow OER creators to do things including engage with topics like media literacy and language learning that might have been very hard to do without relying on fair use and that as I mentioned earlier that it will improve the accessibility and the durability of OER by not leaving key pieces out and hoping that links are maintained and I think as we've seen recently it is important I think that OER is sort of owned and controlled by the educational institutions that have that tie to students and that commercial services often aren't adaptable enough to meet the needs of all students particularly in emergency situations like the one we just saw or for students who don't have reliable access to the internet there are situations in which being able to control the materials within your OER to format shift, to deliver them in different ways is really important for meeting your students needs so the code is a tool for individual and institutional copyright education and it's a guide for reasoning through these repeated situations it's also a useful way to talk to colleagues and gatekeepers and to say my idea that I can rely on fair use here is responsible is aligned with professional practice and it also by putting out this possibility we hope will attract new makers into the OER projects broadly and into creating new projects themselves that being said the code is not sort of all of educational fair use it's also not a handbook on getting the most out of Creative Commons licenses Creative Commons has a certificate program for which all the materials are free and online that's a better sort of tool for that and then finally it's not a sort of prescription of percentages or amounts those amounts I think can seem but they're unfortunately almost always wrong the amount you can use is so situation dependent that there are plenty of times we're using the whole thing as permissible and other times we're using very little it's not the final thing that I would say the code is not is it's not a law degree in a box we do a lot of work with people who themselves aren't creating OER people who are copyright experts like many of you are in their libraries or their educational institutions and this is not intended to allow you in that expert role to tell people the answers it doesn't make you a lawyer if you are not one but it is a tool for you to work with them to help them solve their problems much as librarians are often another sort of institutional experts are often used to helping people find resources to solve other problems the final thing I'll say before passing this off to Will is that this code is really a very consensus based centrist document I like to say this is not about the borderlands this is about the center it reflects the sort of broadly held views of the OER community that we captured through a series of interviews and it's been vetted by a team of independent experts who are a little bit distant to the project itself and so for that reason as we hear about cases that are being sort of end up in the news it's important to remember that much of what we talk about here is in the sort of core domain of fair use and for that reason it's why as Keras and Peter will talk about later it lines up more than you might think at first glance with what is permitted by fair dealing and the quotation right I'm going to briefly display but not read our list of illustrious reviewers just the group out there that I think is has given us the sort of check and balance that what we've heard from the community is also supported by the law and with that I am going to turn it over to Will who's going to tell you a little bit about the code itself thanks all Thank you very much Meredith and thank you everybody for being here today to talk about this topic so I'm Will and I'm excited to talk a little bit about what the code itself says and what that looks like in the sort of the bedrock space of the United States and hopefully that'll set up Keras and Peter to talk some about applying it more broadly I think what Meredith said about the value of centering practices rather than sort of the core legal specifics as an opportunity to harmonize across borders is really really exciting and really really important so I hope you'll see some of that here as Meredith also said the way these codes are generated is we have lots and lots of conversations with people in a particular field and so we start to identify centers of gravity, things people tell us over and over if you're a good open educator this is the sort of thing you need to do and those centers of gravity we start to describe as principles over time so the way the code itself is structured is there's sort of a use case this is the sort of thing open educators need to and ought to be able to do here's a clear statement of principle fair use permits you to do that thing open educators ought to be able to do and then we nuance that some with a set of considerations think about this be careful about that and then hard cases as sort of an outer limit this isn't to get out of jail free card so here's something that moves us maybe not into the borderlands as Meredith described but a little further out from the very very dead center of the principle that we've been talking about here so I'm going to talk through those four very quickly and if you have questions I'm happy to dive into them a little bit more deeply but the first sort of set of core practices that we heard about this first center of gravity was one that made us smile a lot because from a fair use perspective there's no better set of practices to be talking about bringing in materials from third party sources to use as objects of critique commentary and analysis is as core pedagogical practice as you could imagine but it's also as core sort of fair use practice as well the statute explicitly calls out these sorts of practices and so when somebody says I'm writing a poetry textbook I'd like to bring in an actual poem and have people engage with it either the textbook provides the critique and commentary or the students are invited to provide the critique and commentary great news that's absolutely permitted under fair use and so that's our first principle bringing in materials for exactly that purpose the second principle that we talk about is sort of a cousin to that it's bringing in materials not to explicitly critique but instead to illustrate an idea or a principle in some way so when an educator says I want to bring in these pictures of robots from different periods in the history of movies I'm not going to be doing a close reading of those robots necessarily but I want to illustrate the way that's changed over time that again is a core pedagogical practice and a core practice permitted explicitly under fair use as well so that was another easy one that brought a smile to our face and here again we've got one example but you could imagine an iconic image from history being used to talk about a moment in history lots of different examples across disciplines for commentary and critique and for illustration as well the third principle that we identified and we articulate in the code is a little bit different but I think just as important in a lot of different ways and that's the idea that fair use permits you to bring in content as a sort of example of what's happening in the real world or in the lived experiences of people particularly where it develops sort of understanding engagement and opportunities to practice in different ways so the example that we heard a lot was some flavor of the example we have here on the screen which is a language educator who says I can make up a million silly my name is will I go to the store kind of sentences or examples of language but learning is just fundamentally different when students actually engage with the way the language is used in newspaper articles and in this case a telenovela that we spotlighted as well right but this practice of bringing in things from the rest of the world to practice the way it's actually done not just the way an academic might imagine and write down that it's been done and again that's core bedrock fair use that's very much the center of the map as Meredith talked about it so it's an easy and happy third principle for us to articulate in the code and then the final principle is off on the side a little bit but I think important in a lot of different ways I like to think of this as the don't reinvent the wheel principle in some sense this principle specifically speaks to the idea of incorporating existing educational or pedagogical content when those works have fallen out of commerce in some sense so there's a textbook that was written in 1957 80% of it is tremendously out of date it hasn't been available in 25 years it's basically fallen out of use and I wouldn't want to use much of it but the way it describes verb tenses or the way it structures and articulates a set of issues in a process I want to bring that piece in and again where there's not any what a fair user would talk about in terms of market harm or market substitution or I often talk about in terms of whether it's in or out of commerce as well that's a fourth opportunity for people who are creating open educational resources to engage with the outside world bring this thing in and use it to build something new and better and exciting that is what we would call transformative in that sense so those are the four principles as they're articulated looking through those four principles and calling back to a couple of things that Meredith said I really want to articulate this set of core values here the first core value is something that doesn't really show up in the law but it's something that we heard loud and clear as a best practice from open educators is that there's a set of information that you need to provide when you bring in third party materials whether or not the law says you need to do that to be a good practitioner you need to do the work of attribution for example right that's something every single person said to us is I don't know what your lawyers would tell me about my legal obligation to do attribution but if you're not doing attribution you're not being a good educator so please mention that and then the second thing that we heard a lot from folks and this is something we may sort of continue to discuss throughout the rest of the morning here is thinking about open educational resources explicitly as a tool for downstream remixes and re-users in different ways as well so if I release an OER an open educational resource with a CC by license on it and I bring in some third party material into that work I need to make it clear in some fashion to downstream users that that third party material is not mine and so the CC by license doesn't apply to it so some form of clear marking for fair use inclusions felt really really critical to our users and us as well and I'll talk a little bit more about that in just a second but I also wanted to sort of say again something Meredith said very well which is that the core values that run through all these have to do with these questions about equity and accessibility in particular that the work that we're doing here is informed by sort of the opportunity to do the best version of pedagogy but also the opportunity to not limit yourself to the safest or the CC license materials but really to make sure the people featured in our books reflect the diversity of the world in which we live the resources that we provide are available to all students regardless of whether they have hot and cold running Wi-Fi or regardless of these other questions as well and in particular we spent a lot of time talking with people about that practice of linking out that Meredith mentioned and the question of why isn't it enough just to link out and I think Meredith said this very well so I'll just say it again quickly linking out really does create these these problematics in terms of creating a resource that doesn't sort of degrade through link rot over time but it also creates a whole set of issues in terms of really fulfilling the commitment to equity and inclusion that I think animates so much of the open education community's work so thinking about fair use as a tool in those practices feels to me very very important I'll also say sort of a parallel question to that that's come up a lot as we've been going around and talking to people about this is the is the question of you say the law says I can do that but it doesn't feel ethical for me to do that I feel like borrowing from this community makes me feel uncomfortable or use in this way doesn't feel appropriate and so I'll say here something I've said in those other places as well which is what the code can do for you is describe as large a universe as possible of choices for an educator to select from and what we hope that does is it takes a lot of the copyright anxiety off of the table so that educators can properly center questions of pedagogy questions of equity and appropriate behavior and those sorts of things so what you shouldn't take away from this is yeah take it all raid and pillage and take whatever you want and who cares what they think what you should hear instead is don't let the law get in the way of choosing the best resource the most equitable resource the most ethical resource etc that's what we really hope the code will do is give you the power to make the best choices on those other terms by in this moment centering where copyright permits you to do more than you might think you're able to do so quickly as I mentioned a moment ago the code recommends marking there was broad agreement that marking was appropriate there was not broad agreement about how that should be done what that should look like how often that should be done etc and part of that is about this is a code that touches so many different disciplines that it's you know a chemist would say we do it this way and a historian would say we do it that way so what we recommend instead is we offer a set of options in the code we say here are some ways to think about marking we think it's important that in some way you acknowledge that you've brought in third party materials under the code but the way you do that should be tied to the norms and expectations of the communities where you hope this resource will be used so that could be indirect that could be direct that could be hybrid etc but think about that and then ground that in the specific expectations of your community and then finally this is this is a nice segue into Caris and Peter as well often if you're somebody who's reading quickly it's easy to skip past the appendices I want to suggest to you that these appendices in particular are tremendously useful I won't read through all of these bullet points but there's a lot of good information about how the code was developed how the code fits in the context of other aspects of the United States law like patent and trademark and those sorts of things as well how there are these sort of related suite of educational exception that I know Peter's going to speak to a little bit as well that are tremendously important in terms of actually doing this work and then finally this question of how does this code translate across international borders and jurisdictions and how does it sort of have the opportunity to do some work of harmonizing those different legal regimes and ways of thinking through things but in that spirit one of those experts that Meredith mentioned a moment ago is Dr. Caris Craig and so it's my pleasure to step out of the way and let Caris talk to you about how the code aligns with the Canadian law where she thinks and teaches Thanks so much Will and thanks to Kristen Jane for the invitation for bringing us together to talk about this today I'm here in my capacity as a Canadian in spite of the Scottish accent so I have been in Canada since the turn of the century so I'm not going to pretend to be an expert anymore on the current status of the UK law but I did write my master's thesis actually on a comparative analysis of fair dealing and fair use in the US and the UK and Canada way back when so I'm actually just really interested in talking about how these different concepts fit together and sort of mapping these overlaps and the divergencies that we find and I think there's just a lot of lessons in there to be learned about understanding the sort of essential role that user rights and fair dealing or fair use play within the copyright system by virtue of how the system operates in other words as a sort of integral part of how copyright works in all of these jurisdictions so with that as a sort of intro and my main contribution to the code was in the appendix on Canadian fair dealing so the goal here was really to try to ensure that this wasn't seen as exclusively a US document that would be useful for people trying to navigate through OER and the making of OER in the US but as soon as you're looking at taking it outside of the US or you're looking at the Canadian market then suddenly it becomes unusable. We really were convinced from the beginning that it would be possible to write a document and as you've heard as kind of a core centre of what is accepted in best practice for the use of protected materials and make it something that would apply beyond the US and so with a view to Canada I was reviewing it to ensure that what was being said about best practices would be equally true in the Canadian law and then to make sure that that was facially apparent in the document because in Canada and I'm sure it's much the same in the UK we're used to hearing about what fair use permits and there's a tendency to think well that's all well and good for the Americans but we don't have fair use Canada like the UK is of course a fair dealing jurisdiction and so we're used to thinking of that as restricting what it is that we're able to do. On the other hand when we're dealing with educational resources we're dealing with short x-rex and things that are being used for the purpose of teaching for the purpose of ultimately private study then we're very much within the domain of fair dealing and so there's not really a reason why the same sort of freedoms the same best practices wouldn't be available to people in fair dealing jurisdictions. So the main point this is just a sort of summary of how we get there in the appendix but the main point ultimately is that if a use of copyright material is for the purposes of education, private study, criticism and review then we turn to the question of fairness and we can reasonably assume that anything that would be fair in the US fair use analysis would be fair under the fair dealing analysis at least in Canada of course this similarity is is not ultimately a matter of coincidence so I'll just jump ahead this will be familiar to you the fair use defence in the US of course emerged out of the UK course as an equitable doctrine so that's its history that's what Canada inherited as well from the UK so they have this convergence at the very beginning and what happened of course was that in the US it wasn't codified until much later and so there was much more gradual evolution of the concept of fair use in the US course whereas in the UK it was codified and in 1911 it was sort of crystallized as having these restrictive purposes so you had to bring yourself within the purposes of private study research, criticism, review or newspaper summary and that's of course what Canada adopted so we have in the fair dealing regimes this additional hurdle that has to be met before we get to ask whether something is fair and we also know that the UK courts and especially in the sort of 1900s and the Canadian courts followed suit kind of double down on that restriction and took it very seriously such that many different uses were sort of eliminated at that first stage and in Canada some of you may know there has been quite a dramatic development in the jurisprudence around fair dealing over the last 15 years or so and so what we've seen and this sort of traces back to the 2004 CCH case was the court recognizing fair dealing as a user right as essential to a balanced copyright system and therefore as a provision ought not to be narrowly construed so the Supreme Court said you know these are user rights, they're not just loopholes, they must be given a fair and a balanced reading and not unduly constrained and the court also set out a multi factor test that's very similar to the US fairness factors thinking about the purpose of the dealing, the character of the dealing, the amount, the nature of the work being used available alternatives to the dealing so that's one sort of additional factor that's enumerated and the effect of the dealing on the work so these factors to be clear emerged through the case law on the basis of the same statutory provision that mirrored the 1911 UK statutory provision in other words they were sort of derived from understanding the role of fair dealing in the system itself this notion that fair dealing is a user right that's not to be narrowly construed is also present in the subsequent cases so in 2012 we had several more cases where the court kind of doubled down on this idea of user rights and in the Alberta case which is especially interesting it was held that teachers making copies for their students were engaged in fair dealing and they had no ulterior motives their role was in facilitating their students private study and that meant that their dealing was fair and so this is important because it doesn't turn on the addition of education in the statute which I'll mention in a minute it was based upon an interpretation of the meaning of private study and so again based upon the statutory language that the UK and Canada share in common in Bell the court recognised that the dissemination of protected works is an important purpose that fair dealing ought to advance so it's not just about transformation but it's actually about the dissemination and sharing of existing works and stressed that this purpose hurdle the one that Canada and the UK share in common in the US does not have that this was a low hurdle and that the real analytical heavy hitting the real work is always done just in determining whether a dealing is fair taking us back of course to the same factors that we find enumerated in the US statute but which of course emerged from the UK case law so there has as well in the interim been and this puts Canada in a sorry I'll stay here for a second in a relatively better position granted education has been added as a purpose so now we don't need to kind of argue that a teacher's purposes are in facilitating the private study of the student what we can do instead is to say the teacher is engaged in education and that itself is a fair dealing purpose which gets us to the fairness analysis and so all of this sort of explains the similarities that we find between fair dealing in Canada and fair use and in the in the US and we stress that you know open educational resources are going to get over this purpose hurdle they're going to proceed straight to the fairness analysis and then the factors for assessing fairness are going to be the same as the ones that are employed with a view to the same sort of public policy goals as we see being applied in the US there are some differences of course and these are often differences sort of in terminology or maybe a little bit of a difference in balancing and some of these will also align I think with the differences between UK fair dealing and US fair use right now so there is for example like a less explicit focus on transformative nature of use so this transformative use doctrine that the Americans are very comfortable with using doesn't really you know have a foothold a clear foothold in the Canadian law as such but it gets in there because when you're thinking about the purpose of the of the dealing or the character of the dealing the transformative nature of the dealing and the purpose for which is being used are of course important considerations and assessing fairness the addition of and thinking about alternatives that might have been available was a concern to some people if they thought well you know maybe I shouldn't use something because I could always as an alternative not use it or use something something else that's less good so what's important to stress is that that alternatives factor in the Canadian jurisprudence is understood to mean that if there's something that would be equally effective then okay use the thing where you don't have to rely upon fair dealing but where the use is reasonably necessary or would be better then you can rely for dealing network and that will weigh in favour of a determination of fairness the other couple things I flag here very quickly here and the existence of moral rights is something that we and the U.S. doesn't think about quite so much and but we have of course to worry about moral rights in Canada as you do in the UK but once you've got attribution and acknowledgement you're going to be and you're not going to be violating moral rights anyway in the U.S. are being made so just something to be aware of but certainly working within the best practices and you're going to be you're not going to be violating moral rights so it's not really an additional thing to concern ourselves with there was one example I just wanted to mention before I pass things over to Peter and this is that it's true that Canada has traditionally more hostiles and environment for fair fair use or fair dealing than has the U.S. and I know that the same is true of the UK as well but even when we look back at some of the older cases because we're operating within the sort of safe zone at the core of fair dealing we have cases going back to 1997 before CCH ever happened before we had education added as an element factor where a court accepted the reproduction of 100% of a photograph of a front cover of a magazine was important for illustrating a point it was apt to use it to supplement the message of the article that was being written and so I think that this is the kind of use that we're really talking about and it really is in the safe core of what is considered fair dealing in Canada and I believe in the UK as well so with that I'm going to stop and hand things over to Peter. Sorry if I took a minute or two too long. I'm looking forward to hearing what Peter has to say. Peter are you with us? I am with you here I am. So I wanted to thank Keras for the handoff and to say to everyone that I'm approaching this last segment of our talk with a great deal of humility because I am far from being an expert on UK or EU copyright law but the investigation I have done leads to some tentative conclusions which are reflected in one of the appendices to the Code of Best Practices that I wanted to share with you in very condensed form today so I have the next slide please. I think we should go back one. Yes. No, let's go to the next. Next slide please. Yes and D. So the first thing that needs to be said has already been said quite emphatically and that is that of course in the array of national law approaches to copyright limitations and exceptions around the world fair use is an outlier it exists in other jurisdictions it's gradually being adopted in additional jurisdictions but we're still talking about a large handful of countries at best and then much the same can be said about fair dealing. There is a limited set of fair dealing countries and to make matters even a little more complicated those countries often interpret their fair use provisions differently from one another and so we can't always rely in thinking through this position of OER and the use of inserts in OER we can't always rely on the kind of open flexible copyright exceptions that are represented by fair use in the United States or by the highly evolved fair dealing system of Canada and it's important therefore to look for other alternative doctrinal foundations on which an OER best practices code could be built not necessarily foundations that will sustain exactly the same code that we developed with the US and Canada in mind but foundations could nevertheless enable the adoption of similar codes either on a national or on a regional basis and I don't need, I don't want, I'm not competent to talk about it at great length but I did want to point out before we get on to other possible foundations for this kind of a document in other jurisdictions one that deserves exploration and that is the category of educational exceptions. One of the reasons that we rely on fair use so much in the United States in the education sector is that our statutory education exceptions are both out of date and sort of conceptually impoverished and that is true in other countries of the world as Daniel Sun's study points out and although there are certainly difficulties challenges with implementing the kind of best practices that we are discussing today relying solely on a national educational exception it's not out of, it's not a possibility that's out of reach and it needs especially in jurisdictions where there is no other obvious basis on which to go forward to be seriously considered. Next slide please. I want to talk now about the next topic which is the relationship between best practices and the quotation right. As many of you know and as all of you can easily learn the quotation right is a relatively venerable feature of the earned convention to which I think most of the relevant countries that we are discussing or imagining today are either directly or indirectly parties and although the quotation right has been a somewhat neglected aspect of the earned convention for decades it is now enjoying a conceptual revival and that conceptual revival is probably best reflected in the new global mandatory theory used by Professor Aplan and Bentley from which I quote at some length here because this passage from the book expresses much better than I could in my own words I think I let us say an expanded and enlightened a progressive view of the quotation right and of course the most important thing about the quotation right for our purposes is that like fair use like fair dealing it is subject to a general fairness test expressed through the words of best practices excuse me expressed through the word of fair practice and it is stated categorically in article ten one without categorical or subject matter limitations in other words the quotation right potentially applies to a broad range of circumstances in which quotation might be appropriate and to the full range of different kinds of works that might be quoted now the article ten one quotation right has been implemented in many national laws and in some of them French law is a good example the implementation has been very grudging so much so that I think it raises questions about whether those laws are actually in full compliance with article ten one nevertheless every country's quotation right is different and of course in applying or identifying the quotation right as a basis for the erection of best practices in OER those differences need to be taken into account I also would mention and this goes back to something that was saying in the discussion of Canadian law that there is an attribution requirement in article ten one mirrored in the national laws that implement article ten one present as well in Canadian fair dealing and happily as Meredith will explain earlier also present in our code of best practices because it was dictated by U.S. law because every informant need and conversations with in the OER community felt that it was essential. Next slide please so I want to turn back with the greatest of trepidation to the UK for a moment and talk in an extremely guarded way about I think the present situation may be with respect to the question of whether it would be possible to go forward with a best practices document similar not identical to the one that we have created that for the U.S. and Canada the first proposition stated on this slide is one that of course, Harris has already developed and that is that fundamentally all of these anglophone laws of limitations and exceptions come back to a common historical source and that the notion of fairness analysis has been an essential element of those limitations and exceptions from the beginning the one of the things that I think distinguishes the present law of the UK from a lot of other national laws around the world is that it is clear, especially from the 2014 amendments to the to the 1988 act that the UK legislature, legislators have been taking the article 10-1 quotation mandate very, very seriously there are a number of things in the 2014 amendments that have the effect of expanding the potential for each of the U.S. fair dealing in the direction of the practice community with which we are concerned here on the slide I cite only one of them the explicit recognition that fair dealing is appropriate for purposes of illustration as well as critiquing commentary and especially since the line between critiquing commentary and illustration in the use of insurances concerned this is an enormously important proposition for the with respect to the possible future of such best practices in the UK I think that properly understood the sort of the new dispensation in fair dealing in the UK could be the basis for a code that included all or most of the topics touched on in the U.S. best practices document final slide please may have the next slide okay the challenges what lies ahead if one takes this the path that I'm suggesting is a possibility well one of the greatest challenges in the interpretation of the quotation is the its application beyond the sort of low hanging fruit of textual quotation but experts I think have made a persuasive case and they are backed up by the language of the 2014 amendments that in general and certainly in the UK the quotation right should apply with equal force to appropriate audio visual and even musical quotations we all need to be on guard our own jurisdictions against restrictive interpretations of the right quotation right and prepared to meet them with whatever tools we have so with that I think there's maybe one more slide yes next steps so let me just go down the list again these are prescriptive and I offer them with humility on the one hand in a certain sense of urgency on the other OER practitioners who are ultimately responsible for their own fate in this space need to demand and to encourage interpretations of existing law which provide the greatest possible scope for their essential activities and that's where best practices come in best practices centrist in nature consensual in source are a tremendously effective way of pushing appropriate interpretations of as yet uninterpreted or lightly interpreted provisions of law and the problem I think that faces Europe sort of zooming out now from UK in particular is that as we've already suggested and as is clearly true for example with respect to the US and Canada cross-border sharing of materials adoption and adaptation of materials translation of OER materials is going to be an important part of any broadly successful European OER initiative and unfortunately as we know the local implementation of limitations and exceptions in European jurisdictions is individualistic maybe a good way of putting it and and occasionally a source of of difficulty for this kind of cross-border sharing so I want to close with the proposition or a proposition that may seem to be contradictory to the ones that I was insisting on earlier in these remarks namely that there were already a lot of features in international and national law that could enable a best practices approach to OER and suggest that in at least some jurisdictions it may be that realizing the full potential of OER will will not be possible until some kind of law reform takes place at the national level to introduce or to reintroduce an open flexible copyright exception we couldn't have done this in the US without such an exception and it may well be that it will be difficult to do it or to do it fully elsewhere without that kind of of law reform and that's that's what I've got I'm interested in reactions to these remarks and to our whole presentation and so I think I'm just going to hand off now to Stefan Gamble and and Bart Milletti. Yeah that's great Peter yeah thank you thank you to all our presenters from your team as well and I think if we can kind of save the questions I think it would be great to hear from Stefan from Bartolomeo with their reaction to what you've told us lots of food for thought there about the need for copyright reform in Europe and whether maybe some of the reforms that we've got might be suitable so over to you too I'm not sure which one of you is going first but the floor is yours Bart yeah thanks Jane I think I'm going first and thanks very much everyone for your great and incredibly interesting presentation and also for another excellent code of best practices in fair use I really want to thank you also because your work on the codes of best practices has really been incredibly inspiring for us in a literal way it has inspired a pilot project that Chris Jane and I have been working on this academic year which is aimed at developing a code of fair practice for film educators and it's also inspired a project that Stef and I are currently working on for the 2020 consortium recreating Europe and that project specifically aims to develop codes of best practices for documentary filmmakers and curators of immersive experiences in the UK and the Netherlands and as a first step Stef and I have recently conducted a series of online workshops with these communities to generate a picture of the copyright related issues that these communities face and cross-border uses of works that rely on exceptions and how to deal with the territoriality of the law where among the most prominent issues that have been highlighted by all the sectors that we've been talking to so not just documentary filmmakers and immersive practitioners but also film educators so I think today's discussion is definitely extremely relevant and I mean maybe we can discuss that later but I agree with Peter's suggestion that the quotation right is probably the right basis in certain jurisdictions in Europe and specifically in the UK to erect a code of best practices here and especially I mean more specifically I would say section 31 that the quotation exception which is not limited by purpose so it's very much open-ended is probably the right one however I mean I would like to focus my short response today on also two other major challenges that have been mentioned by our participants in the workshops with documentary filmmakers and immersive practitioners which I think also apply to OERs so the first one which we had the opportunity also to discuss on other occasions is the risk that by codifying permitted uses one may end up circumscribing activities and this one specifically came up at the workshop with documentary filmmakers in the UK so most participants that workshop had no experience of relying on fair dealing and seemed to consider rights clearance basically the only viable option to produce archive based documentaries that can be exploited fully and safely this was for various reasons including the uncertainty surrounding exceptions and their lack of resources to properly learn about copyright but in particular it was because of the conservative approach of funders broadcasters and distributors who often require clear rights in all the materials included in the film that they found broadcaster distribute however one participant was a producer with extensive experience of creating documentaries about cinema and filmmakers and who relied almost entirely on exceptions to reuse film clips so the participants who didn't rely on exceptions expressed the desire for and I'm quoting here some form of centralized or collaborative support to help each other understand exceptions as a community and most specifically they thought it would be helpful to know what uses have been considered fair dealing in the past and so be able to rely on those precedents however the participants who already relies on fair dealing on a regular basis argued that and again I'm quoting here because it is a wild west and a grey area the practice of relying on fair dealing expanded hugely in the last 10 years or so and is very little challenged the danger of suggesting a clear framework is that you end up circumscribing activities and according to this participant basically there is a benefit in being small and below the radar I'm quoting here again but I'm quoting here because it is a very difficult and never get challenged their concern didn't relate to just the challenge also discussed by scholars in this context that by encouraging certain practices you may signal that other practices are questionable but they were concerned basically that in practice they are sort of pretty happy with how things work for them now in their words dodging between the lines in this conversation to the fore may alert copyright owners who may then start challenging those uses so on this point my question is how can we respond to the need of the majority of filmmakers that we talk to who are keen to better understand discuss and rely more on exceptions while at the same time responding to the concerns of this producer and others who feel kind of comfortable in the grey zone in which they currently operate and also whether there is like a similar challenge with the open education resources community my second point was raised by a couple of curators of immersive experiences in the other workshop and that concerns the format and sustainability of the codes for these participants were aware of existing guides and information about copyright but they stressed that artists and organizations only have a certain amount of time and again I quote here to absorb and learn all of that information about copyright and then the load changes and moves on and these results in artists having a very dangerous tiny amount of knowledge that's best ignored so you go straight to somebody that does know and I think this quote basically raises several important questions about the sustainability of these initiatives so one is if copyright users like filmmakers, curators of immersive experiences or authors of open educational resources only have a limited amount of time to think about copyright then what is the most effective format for the codes of best practices and does that format need to change depending on the sector and my last question is especially now that we are thinking about and exploring the possibility of creating global versions of the codes how can we keep track of legislative changes in different jurisdictions so I appreciate these are quite a lot of challenging questions so I just wanted to put them all out there but yeah if you could just pick one or two and share your thoughts on those that would be incredibly helpful and once again thanks very much for your great work thank you very much so I think at this point the questions that you're asking there about how do we I think Peter's got his hand up so he's interested in answering those I just wanted to add to that I think that's a very, the thing that's been on my mind about this is how we deal with the industry and those organisations and what they might think about it so I'll hand over to Peter, Steph were you also going to come in with some comments as well or shall I hand over to Peter to respond to any of those I have some comments but I'm also happy if Peter goes first to answer some of Bart's questions I'll be very quick because I think there are the US experience in this area which is now 16 or 17 years in all the code of best practices in documentary filmmaking in 2005 having been our first outing in this area I think we have some practical as well as some theoretical responses to Bart's question one is simple and that is that the although scholars have sometimes expressed concern about the notion that the codes would end up limiting as much as enabling the the activities in the various fields of practice it simply hasn't happened one of the reasons it hasn't happened may be that the codes have always been drafted in a way that makes it absolutely clear that they represent a centrist norm and not outer limits on the application of fair use in the case of OER fair dealing as well maybe it's also the case that once these ideas simply take hold they're sort of irresistible and they can't easily be restrained by a piece of paper so if you look at what the the original code of best practice what we were discussing as applications of fair use connection with the 2005 code of best practices for documentary filmmakers and compare that to what filmmakers are now actually doing with the code under fair use it's two very different worlds there has been a tremendous flowering of individual practice which I think the code has had the the effect of releasing rather than constraining the sustainability question that Bart raises and is an extremely important one any copyright guidance document including a guidance document about limitations and exceptions risks becoming irrelevant as time passes and new law is laid down that's particularly true of documents that try to establish metrics to say well you know 15% of that or 3 bars of the other or a thousand pixels of this as Meredith pointed out earlier the codes of best practices don't do that the codes of best practices describe a thought process that petitioners can use to get from a presentation of a question about whether an appropriate exception applies to a conclusion easily quickly and with robust results and documents in that form or at least our experience has been over 17 years seem to wear very well in terms of sustainability they incorporate they absorb developments in law rather than sort of breaking open because of them so I'm actually a little bit confident based on experience that although theoretically that's clearly a significant problem it doesn't seem in practice once again to have caused anybody harm now then there's this other thing about invisibility wouldn't it be better just to fly below the radar and we heard that a lot 17 years ago when we were talking about documentary filmmakers and of course it's true perhaps for people who already get it who have good lawyers who have lots of experience it isn't true for everybody else isn't true for new entrants into the field isn't true for students isn't true for people who are trying new things rather than sort of plowing ahead in an established furrow what we haven't seen is this eruption of of sort of negative feedback from industry and I think the reason is very simple and that is they have the best lawyers of all and they know perfectly well that these codes of best practices are founded on reasonable centrist interpretations and if they were to harass someone all the way to a courtroom they would have to lose which would impede their ability to shake everybody down for licensing fees they actually shouldn't be paying and I'll stop there. Yeah that's great Peter, thank you can we get Steph to do a response as well I know you've got some points you wanted to pick up and if others have got anything they want to raise pop that in the chat we're not going to have a lot more time I think at the end of the session for questions as we're due to finish but over to you Steph. Okay thank you Jane and thank you for all the presenters for this great overview of the codes of best practices for open educational resources it's really informative and it's great to see you and I actually really like this move of exporting the idea that of course originated in the US to different jurisdictions that's also my first comment is about it's actually about organizations. I really liked a carousel presentation where she showed that the US norm kind of resembles the fair dealing doctrine in Canada possibly also the UK and then Peter ties to that that a similar norm can actually be found in article 10 one of the burn convention I stick there that's really great but with this last norm and this is a bit the elephant in the room article 10 one of the burn convention is of course a minimum standard it doesn't say that we have to actually explain the quotation right in as broad fashion as Tanya and Lionel Bentley suggest in their excellent book and so what Franz they they applied a very narrow quotation right similar as many other European countries I think in the Netherlands we apply a bit broader quotation right but not even close to what the fair dealing allows or even close to what the fair use norm in US allows. So the harmonizing effect of the burn convention or other international treaties might be less strong than we would hope that it could have and then the question is and Peter rightly pointed this out what you need in order to get a code of best practice to move across other jurisdictions that do not have such open norms as fair use or fair dealing is you need copyright reform so the question there is do you think that the codes that you have developed would actually could actually inspire jurisdictions to apply a broader and a more open or even apply a broader quotation standard as Tanya Applin and Lionel Bentley describe that's one question another one is a very short remark that ties to Meredith's statement and also actually will cross example. So Meredith stated that these codes of best practice are bottom approaches they are informed by sector practices which make them very strong actually what Peter just also gave as a remark to actually fighting the industry meaning that these are norms that arise in practice and they are considered fair and they are based on common norms and what we'll add to that is the ethical approach that's what we actually also saw back in our interviews with documentary filmmakers this is an interesting thing relying on fair use or fair dealing or the quotation right isn't permitted acts you don't need at all consent from the right holders concern in the Netherlands all documentary filmmakers that we spoke to were actually convinced of even if they would use an artificial work under the quotation exception they would still find it appropriate to inform the filmmaker whose items they used that they're doing it and that was based also on ethical standard and they also explained this because I immediately asked why do you do this because you don't need to so their answer was we also would find it appropriate if they would ask us if they're going to quote our film that you were producing in their work we're not going to say that they can't if they do it fairly under quotation right fair dealing or fair use so the ethical part of the code is very strong I would say and I would want to leave it to this thanks very much Steph so yes Peter or someone from the team want to respond to either one of those comments I'm happy to take certainly the first about the inspirational value of the codes I think the answer to that is clearly yes I think that we have seen that in the US at various different levels over the last 17 years we've seen the existence of the codes push practice in new and productive directions we've also seen the codes begin to influence the formation of legal doctrine there is and maybe somebody can put it in the chat an extremely interesting recent case called Marano against the Metropolitan Museum which involves a museum practice that was specifically discussed and approved in the College Art Association Code of Best Practices and Fair Use for the visual arts and the Metropolitan Museum when challenged by an individual photographer relied heavily on the CAA Code of Best Practices from I think 2011 and in the end they were their efforts that their defenses were crowned with success at both the district court and the circuit court level so it's taken a while but we're beginning to see overt illustrations of the codes sort of leaking their way into law formation and I want to emphasize that in the US we don't at least most of us don't want to do law reform with respect to Fair Use itself we tend to think that for all its its words and wrinkles section 107 is probably the best formulation of a Fair Use doctrine that could be achieved and it could probably never be achieved again if the issue were to be reopened for reconsideration in other jurisdictions where the current level of recognition of limitations and exceptions is lower or less complete or less flexible or less open I am convinced that strong, centrist codes of best practices can also be a tool for thinking about legislative reform so I'm very optimistic about that I think it's a reason to go ahead rather than a reason to you know sort of hesitate in my view and the question about ethics is interesting we've seen a good deal of that in our work as well the specific ethical question that was raised by your informants and the Netherlands staff has not come up in our practice partly because I think many documentary filmmakers don't feel themselves actually to be part of the same community as Hollywood Studios or big television networks who stuff they want to use informally I think they do a lot of that of notification of use among themselves one doc filmmaker to another but most of them would not feel that they had to give 20th Century Fox notice and they were using a four second click from a movie Thanks Peter, thanks that's really helpful we are running out of time so really key from anyone else in the team they want to bring in at that point I think it's sort of you know it's really kind of fascinating to see how your work on the codes might be able to be translated and it's certainly something that Chris and I are very keen to work with the community in the UK specifically this one around open educational resources to adapt and I see Emily but in some questions I think really this is just the start of this conversation in the UK we're massively grateful to you all for joining us and I think we'd really like to hear from people particularly who've joined the webinar today or who are tuning in afterwards if they want to work with us on this Chris do you want to say anything I see Peter's got his hand up he's probably going to come in I wonder whether you've looked at Emily's question I think if we can have one more comment I think then we'll bring the session to a close but absolutely this is a really great opportunity to think about how we might get this work going around in the UK and the rest of the world but over to Peter so two points one is that that we'll be very happy to the extent that it is useful to look through the chat and to try to respond in whatever format or forum makes the most sense to the issues raised think about if we could do a follow up blog post or something that would be great and with respect to Emily I think Emily is absolutely right the process by which the codes in the US have helped to well I would say two things they have helped to create practices in the sense that they have encouraged people to use the thought process that the code describes to analyze new as well as familiar situations as they arise and since they documentary filmmaking there have been lots of changes in the technology of the field over 17 years the approach of the codes which emphasizes thought process rather than prescriptive outcome has proved to be quite adaptable when we started doing this for example filmmakers didn't use social media content in their films because it wasn't easy to harvest and apply in fact of course in 2005 there has been an explosion in that area many documentary films do make use selectively appropriately, briefly of social media content of citizen journalism and self-reporting online and they do that now not despite the code which doesn't specifically mention this issue but I would argue at least in part because of the code which is like various itself sort of capacious and flexible enough to accommodate new circumstances and encourage progressive results and I think I will stop there thank you for having us thank you Peter, yeah this has just been so fascinating and there are actually loads of questions on my mind as well things like in the UK we have educational licensing kind of hard baked into our legislations how does that fit in we have questions you mentioned out of commerce as part of that now we have specific out of commerce provisions in the EU but then UK has left the EU and we are over time now but what I would like to say is if this is the beginning of this conversation about how we work together there's lots of I think energy and excitement and desire to do something so we are keen to continue this conversation so thank you very much for taking the time all of you on the team thanks to Bart and Steph for your excellent comments as well and we definitely want to pick up on the things that we have surfaced here and put them in a format where we can share these as widely as possible and certainly reach out into the open education community as well as the copyright community in the UK so thank you again everyone for all your time yeah please drop us a line anyone who wants to follow that up with us as I say we are aware of the time we're just going over to our final wrap up slide Chris I'm having some trouble getting the slides to share we were hoping you might say that Leo I'm looking to you and members of the Alts Open at SIG so the final point we were going to make we do have I can't believe it's not Ice Pops as the next event that's kind of part of the series but actually something different and in fact our guests today certainly will be joining us for one of those sessions but the program that Jane shared is earlier we do have a number of other topics that are on the list copying literary works is something that's very relevant at the moment discussions around control digital lending but there are many other provisions we're looking at discussing in the UK we know that we universities have been hit with quite a few infringement notifications from photographers the practice known as copyright trolling so we're working on and we're speaking to colleagues at Creative Commons to see if they can come and help us because there are some issues with the digital date actually for that event we're looking at the 23rd of July so we'll be in touch with that we're still always discussions about audio visual works and we're also looking ahead to the academic year I know I've been doing a lot of work how do we navigate those challenges when we're in this kind of halfway house between is it for lockdown is it not what's happening what are those principles that we discussed during that time of crisis mean cooperation copyright and hybrid learning so there we go so at this stage we will thank everyone again and we will stop the recording if I could get