Some notes from a recent discussion

First lets start off with the fundamental difference between Copyright in Swedish and Anglo/American law. Anglo/American law views copyright as the right to copy or reproduce. Swedish law sees copyright (upphovsrätt roughly translates as the right of origin). This foundamental difference creates problems when attempting to implement or discuss copyright in the different legal regimes.

Those people within universities which may be involved in copyright discussions can be one of three groups of people.

Students
Students can be funded by the university but are not seen as employees for the purpose of copyright. Students however are viewed as â??quasi-employeesâ?? when the discussion of work environment is discussed in the university â?? however this has no bearing on copyright issues.

Therefore the student is not seen as an employee. All/everything produced during his/her period of study belongs to him/her. The university has no copyright in essays, software, artwork or more. This can naturally be changed by contract â?? but then the student must be compensated in some way.

Phd Students (â??selfâ?? funded/funded by the university)
Often viewed as employees. They have the trappings of the employee. Office space, telephone & equipment. However for the discussion of employment relationship the Phd project does not count as work.

The â??selfâ?? employed Phd student is not seen as an employee. All/everything produced during his/her period of study belongs to him/her. The university has no copyright in essays, software, artwork or more. This can naturally be changed by contract â?? but then the student must be compensated in some way. This can be the case of research projects where the Phd student participates.

Phd students funded by the university may be seen as employees. These students are therefore employees who are being paid to produce something for the university. The product belongs to the university (not the moral rights since the moral rights always belong to the author). Traditionally universities in Sweden do not exercise their right to the product. Any attempt to exercise this right must be explicit and based upon contract.

Researchers (â??selfâ?? funded/funded by the university)
The â??selfâ?? employed researcher is not seen as an employee. All/everything produced during his/her period of study belongs to him/her. The university has no copyright in essays, software, artwork or more. This can naturally be changed by contract â?? but then the researcher must be compensated in some way.

Researchers funded by the university may be seen as employees. These researchers are therefore employees who are being paid to produce something for the university. The product belongs to the university (not the moral rights since the moral rights always belong to the author). Traditionally universities in Sweden do not exercise their right to the product. Any attempt to exercise this right must be explicit and based upon contract.

Employees
This group includes all employees who are being paid to produce something for the university. The product belongs to the university (not the moral rights since the moral rights always belong to the author). Traditionally universities in Sweden do not exercise their right to the product. Any attempt to exercise this right must be explicit and based upon contract.

A discussion can naturally be carried out as to what it is that is the employees are being employed to produce.

Additional questions of interest

Access to public information
Any and all material handed in to the university for grading (essays, exams & phd thesisâ??) are considered to be public information. Such public information is available to all who would like to read it (a cost for copying and sending may be levied).

Competing work
Employees at universities have a duty to be loyal and therefore should not carry out work which competes with the goals of the university. This may include abusing positions of trust by producing teaching material which they sell as compulsory material to students. The latter is not prohibited but may be frowned upon.