In an interesting sunshine law case, a Missouri appeals court ruled last week that the state’s public records law does not require the University of Missouri to disclose class syllabi prepared by professors.
The decision came in a lawsuit brought by a Washington, D.C.-based group, National Council of Teachers Quality, which had argued that the Missouri sunshine law required disclosure of the documents actually distributed to students.
The Columbia Daily Tribune reported:
The Missouri Court of Appeals Western District yesterday sided with a Boone County circuit court decision in favor of the university’s stance that “faculty members hold copyright ownership in their syllabi and, thus, that the syllabi’s disclosure was protected by the Federal Copyright Act,” according to the ruling.
“We are pleased with the ruling by the Court of Appeals,” UM System Spokesman John Fougere said in a statement. “In responding to the NCTQ’s request for course syllabi, we felt it was important to respect the rights of the faculty members who created the syllabi. We are glad that both courts to review the matter have concluded that we acted lawfully.”
An earlier circuit court decision had been in the university’s favor, and the NCTQ appealed.
At trial, the University argued that the subject syllabi fell within Section 610.021(14), which authorizes a public governmental body to close “[r]ecords which are protected from disclosure by law.” Specifically, the University’s position was that its faculty members hold copyright ownership in their syllabi and, thus, that the syllabi’s disclosure was protected by the Federal Copyright Act. 17 U.S.C. § 106(1), (3) (2012) (The Federal Copyright Act provides copyright owners the “exclusive rights to do and to authorize” reproduction and distribution of their copyrighted works.). Upon review of the evidence presented, the circuit court entered judgment, finding that the University “met its burden of persuasion to demonstrate compliance with” the Sunshine Law.
The appeals court upheld the earlier ruling:
…in order to disclose the syllabi as requested by the NCTQ, the University would have to reproduce and distribute the syllabi. Thus, while the Federal Copyright Act does not explicitly protect against disclosure, it does protect against the means by which the requested disclosure would be obtained. Disclosing the syllabi to the NCTQ — through reproduction and distribution — would constitute a violation of the Federal Copyright Act. Therefore, the syllabi as requested are “protected from disclosure by [the Federal Copyright Act].”
The group says it intends to appeal to the Missouri Supreme Court.
You can read the decision here.
Discover more from i L i n d
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
There’s more to the story that should emerge on further appeal. If a professor uses school facilities, equipment, or materials, or is acting as a school employee while making a discovery which then gets patented and sold for profits or royalties, the university owns some or all of the rights and is entitled to some or all of the profits. Writing a course sylllabus is clearly a part of the duties a professor is required to perform as part of his job. He gets paid for writing it. It should be viewed in the same way as an instruction manual that accompanies a washing machine or TV set — the syllabus or instruction manual is the property of the university or the appliance company, and is not owned by the author who wrote it. Especially in the case of a public tax-supported university, the public has a right to know what the students are being taught and what requirements the students must meet to get course credit. Anyone strolling through the UH bookstore can easily see the outrageous leftist one-sidedness of courses in Political Science, Hawaiian Studies, Sociology, History, etc. Same goes for the UH syllabi which are posted on the internet. I hope the NCTQ will persist with its lawsuit, so the people of Missouri can hold their government employees (i.e., professors, department heads, and deans) accountable for what goes on in the cesspool.