Communities of practice were men- tioned as being a vital way to keep up to date about copyright, but also a place to share knowledge rather than rely on hearsay and myths. Conveying supportive messages about copyright was also seen as important, as opposed to negative messaging or threats of infringement or fines. Attending training and keeping up to date about copyright is obviously important, but this needs to be done in a meaningful and engaging way. In the focus groups, participants mentioned the value of teaching using scenarios and games-based learning. This aligned with our previous research into games and play (Secker and Morrison, 2022). Participants said these approaches helped to make copyright meaningful but also avoided staff just switching off or seeing copyright as ‘boring’ or irrelevant.
In summary Figure 1.
l copyright advisors/librarians in HE report they experience ‘imposter syndrome’ (presumably because they are not lawyers);
l copyright is a constant challenge even for experienced professionals.
Why does copyright anxiety exist? There are three reasons why copyright anxiety exists, some of which may help point to potential solutions. Firstly, the nature of copyright law itself; there are penalties if you infringe, but whether your use is lawful or not is often uncertain. The lack of clarity over questions such as how much can be copied is deliberate and can work in favour of copyright users in many instances. Those staff who develop their knowledge of copyright recognise that flexibility is a key part of the law. Many important aspects of copyright law are framed as ‘standards’ (e.g. is it ‘fair’) not rules (e.g. you may copy up to x per cent of a work) and exceptions are deliberately written in ways that enable them to be interpreted flexibly. Secondly, we found institutional policies within HEIs can give rise to copyright anxiety, particularly when they are poorly drafted or contain contradictions or expectations that are out of alignment with practice. Thirdly, those practices are linked to individuals’ knowledge, skills and attitudes which vary and are often not clearly expressed. Respondents spoke about the fear of “getting copyright wrong” which became even more problematic when trying to communicate with colleagues or students to whom they felt responsible. The relationship between these three factors – copyright law, institutional policy and individual practices – were further complicated by the hierarchies and power structures within organisations. Copy-
46 INFORMATION PROFESSIONAL
right advisors, who are often librarians at a relatively junior grade, may well have a lower status than the staff they are advising. Where they are not sufficiently empowered or supported in this respon- sibility, they can provide cautious advice which then leads to copyright chill.
How to overcome copyright anxiety Rather like other forms of anxiety, simply saying “don’t worry about it” won’t make copyright anxiety go away. We need to understand the causes and work out when it’s an appropriate response and when it’s not. Copyright anxiety is common in the library community, often because librar- ians are put into the position of advising others about copyright. This leads to a greater sense of responsibility but may also contribute to risk averse advice, for fear of getting it wrong for others. It also indicates how a little bit of knowledge can be challenging, as individuals worry unduly about the consequences of making the wrong call once they become aware of the theoretical risks around copyright infringement.
Similarly, copyright chill is where unfounded fears about copyright are having a negative impact on people’s interpretation of the law. This may lead staff to believe content cannot be shared in ways that are justifiable under fair dealing or other exceptions.
Copyright is an anxiety-inducing aspect of higher education work but our data suggests there are things that may help. It goes without saying that institutions need clear policies and guidance; however, many respondents reported that internal policies were out of alignment with insti- tutional or discipline specific practices. They also noted that it was unclear where decision-making responsibility sat.
In conclusion, comparing the survey data from the 2023 study to the previous study (Wakaruk et al, 2021) indicates that those working in higher education are likely to be more worried about copyright than the gen- eral public but also less likely to abandon projects because of copyright. Meanwhile, our focus groups suggest copyright is causing an undue amount of anxiety and emotional labour, which can result in legal chill that hampers or prevents the work of those in higher education. This is having a significant impact on those working in libraries, academic staff, and other professional services staff such as learning designers and learning technologists. We can only speculate about the reasons for the different responses from UK and Canadian HE professionals, but the recent litigation in Canada might have led to an increased awareness of users’ rights in that country and, thus, a reduction in copyright anxiety.
We know we cannot remove all anxiety associated with navigating copyright. However, our research suggests that there are ways we can mitigate it, including the use of training scenarios and games-based learning. We also concluded that normalising these emotions and discussing copyright issues within communities can help alleviate some of the stress and, hopefully, reduce or eliminate chill. A longer article based on these findings will be published in 2025 in the Journal of Copyright Edu- cation and Librarianship. IP
References Secker, J and Morrison, C (2017). Understanding librarians’ experiences of copyright. Library Management, 38(6/7), 354–368.
https://doi.org/10.1108/LM-01-2017-0011
Secker, J. & Morrison, C., (2022). Playing with Copyright, The Journal of Play in Adulthood 4(2), 106-125. doi:
https://doi.org/10.5920/jpa.1034
Wakaruk, A., Gareau-Brennan, C., Pietrosanu, P. (2021). Introducing the Copyright Anxiety Scale. Journal of Copy- right in Education and Librarianship, 5(1), 1–38.
https://doi.org/10.17161/jcel.v5i1.15212
Autumn 2025
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70
