Search results

This article discusses the effects of “Napster‐like” clone programs on the future of academic e‐books. This review will, first, catalogue the rise and fall of Napster and the development of clone programs that facilitate peer‐to‐peer file sharing; second, examine the main methods by which e‐books are placed on the Web; third, discuss piracy and the subsequent legal issues of intellectual property. Finally, the concept of e‐books in the world of academic publications will be analysed.

This article presents a preliminary discussion of two points of interest. Part one puts forward that libraries need to be actively aware of the health and safety issues relating to computer work‐stations, this awareness will allow sensible steps to be taken not just to mitigate potential liability concerns but to ensure that computer technology is accessible and also easily and comfortably used by library employees and public users of the library. Part two argues that libraries will need to be versed in the dual disciplines of computer technology and copyright law to allow librarians and the library's computer support service to prevent copyright infringement. Libraries must distance themselves from potential piracy such as e‐book, music, games and computer software downloads facilitated by the peer‐to‐peer network. The article reviews, dissects and finally presents some tentative solutions that may mitigate the potential litigation from health and safety and piracy.

As the predicted escalation in the litigation becomes a reality for universities in the UK, increasing importance is placed on the consideration given to the integrity of institutional protocols regulating decision making at all stages of student progression. The purpose of this paper is to outline the structures that are in place to provide an analysis of the issues that arise when these protocols are activated.

This paper first, provides a brief yet accessible overview of the literature concerning the institutions involved in student appeal, second, explains the principles that should be applied when using and analysing university protocols, third, analyses the role that mediation can play within the sector, and finally, discusses the disability dimension within a complaints context.

It can be seen that disputes between student and institution are on the rise for a number of reasons, be it finance, complexity of legislation or otherwise. The robust nature of what the office of the independent adjudicator (OIA) does seems evident from the lack of successful challenge by way of judicial review, even though the process has been held to be reviewable in a limited way at least. Perhaps this will give some reassurance to the aggrieved student that their version of events will be heard and judged fairly, but the overwhelming message to institutions must be to address potential issues early by means of well drafted protocols, management of student expectation and possibly the establishment of some sort of campus ombudsman which may help deter, deflect or even solve disputes. The role of the OIA seems here to stay and the amount of business it does is likely to increase.

Increasing importance is placed on the consideration given to the integrity of institutional protocols regulating decision making at all stages of student progression. A wide variety of elements can impact on the quality of service expected compared with that provided to a student cohort, and this results in a diversity of potential complaints which have to be covered by university protocols. The value of this paper lies in the applicability of the themes that are discussed.

The purpose of this paper is to outline the challenges and potential solutions of initiating a Sharia law module within a UK law school.

The approach is practical with focus placed on the local and international dimensions.

Sharia law is a popular module which adds to a law graduate's portfolio of international legal experience alongside the supplementary benefits provided to students attending from other disciplines. The advantages of interactions with local communities are also discussed.

Only a relatively small number of UK law schools run a module concerning Sharia or Islamic law, thus the paper facilitates other schools furthering the international aspects involved in the teaching and practice of law.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse the parameters of the duty of reasonable adjustment to facilitate access to e‐learning resources.

Educational providers continue to develop new methods of delivering content in digital format, the increasing use of broadband, web‐based resources and new content creation software provides numerous methods of delivering excellence in content creation and delivery. It is important that this excellence is available to all; to this end the disability aspects of e‐learning provision are discussed in this paper, specifically relating to a anticipatory “duty of reasonable adjustment” to facilitate access to computer‐based learning resources within the UK education sector.

The paper concludes that the concept of reasonable adjustment is likely to remain unclear within the current statutory framework, is dynamic in relation to e‐learning software applications, and will continue to increase in scope and complexity as advanced software applications are used on a larger scale in the education sector.

After relating general accessibility approaches to the various open and proprietary source software applications and the concept of “lock in,” the paper argues that knowledge of reasonable adjustment is optimally considered in the early planning stage of development rather than after implementation, under the legislatively mandated anticipatory model. Further conclusions are presented which propose that the approaches described can be scaled up to provide general themes, which benefits the full spectrum of disability alongside the wider student cohort.

Further work is discussed and includes a potential UK extension of the analysis presented by Scroggins in 2007 concerning measurement and structural modeling of reasonableness under the provisions of the US Rehabilitation Act of 1998 and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990.

The purpose of this paper is to assess the financial and intellectual issues facing the university sector as many institutions in the UK pursue alternative revenue streams. As a consequence to the increasing financial pressures, university departments are increasingly exposed to new forms of potential litigation and also face the risk to the prestige of their university and departmental brand.

A theoretical and analytical approach is adopted whereby an introduction to the topic of revenue streams is presented before a review is conducted of the two most prominent and important streams available to the higher education sector – teaching and technology transfer. The paper furthers this analysis through a discussion of the accompanying legal consequences to UK universities and offers strategies to be adopted by such institutions to avoid these pitfalls.

The investigation has identified that the pursuit of additional sources of money from teaching and technology transfer pose significant risks and should only be considered after a rigorous analysis of the associated cost by institutional and departmental management structures.

The paper offers an insight into the experience of litigation and the intellectual problems encountered by university departments in the USA. This evidence is utilised to consider how it may provide UK‐based counterparts with a guide to avoid similar problems. It will be of relevance to practitioners, managers and strategic planners in the university sector.