An ethical question about reusing a curriculum that's not supposed to be...

[Merry]

passed on to any other student....

Calvert has the policy that the lesson manual is to be used by only one student but I see that many people reuse the manual for the other kids in the family or resell or buy the manuals from former users. I myself have reused a couple of lesson manuals for my youngest child who is eight years younger than my other kids. But it's a sticky issue for me as I don't feel right about it. I have an old 5th grade manual that I'd love to reuse for my upcoming fifth grader but I'm struggling with my conscience over this. Am I making too big a deal? My dh keeps saying to just reuse it and don't spend the money on buying a whole year of curriculum when I already have most of it. Is there a good reason why Calvert has this policy? I tried asking the Calvert school staff this but didn't get a straight answer from them.

[AnointedHsMom]

If you are reusing within your own family I don't see a problem. I mean honestly how can they expect you not to use it within your family. Don't lose sleep over it at all.

[kristinannie]

I wouldn't purchase one from someone else, but I would definitely use it with my other kids! I wouldn't think they would have any problem with that at all! I don't feel guilty at all making "illegal" copies of my son's work so DD3 can "play school." I think the point is to not resell them and undercut their profit since it takes a lot of work to create those.

[pahansen]

We've used Calvert. My understanding is that you can reuse for your own family, but you must destroy rather than resell or give away the materials.

 

From what I recall, you used to be able to buy only the workbooks, etc. for a grade level when you had more than one child using Calvert. There was some sort of reuse policy. I would definitely not rebuy, and I would have a clean conscience about it.

 

--Pamela

[Hunter]

Throwing away perfectly good books to buy another identical set seems more morally wrong to me, than ignoring a copyright, that is...just...what?

 

Most religions don't require strict obedience to a rule that violates a greater rule or principal. It gets sticky when one rule violates another.

 

I don't have the answer for you, but I have broken certain copyright laws in the past, without feeling guilty. Throwing away that manual seems wrong to ME, very WRONG!

[LittleIzumi]

I don't think they have the right to ask that. However, I think if you purchase it from them you are agreeing to their TOS. I will reuse things like that (WP products, notably) but I only buy them used.

[wy_kid_wrangler04]

I don't think they have the right to ask that. However, I think if you purchase it from them you are agreeing to their TOS. I will reuse things like that (WP products, notably) but I only buy them used.

 

 

Can you call them and get permission for use for other kids within your family?

 

I am speaking JUST for myself here, but whether man knows if I do it or not, God still does and I will be held accountable. I wouldn't if you can not get permission from them. I would try to get permission though for within your own family.

[sbgrace]

I wouldn't do anything that violated my conscience. Check on the Calvert policy about family members. If it's as you understand it, given what you wrote, I would not reuse the material. IMO going against your own belief/conscious would not be at all worth the cost of a new material.

[pahansen]

From what I recall, you used to be able to buy only the workbooks, etc. for a grade level when you had more than one child using Calvert. There was some sort of reuse policy.

 

 

Oh my. I just found the reuse policy, and it is rather insane. I can understand that they don't want people selling or giving away proprietary information, but this seems almost wasteful. And you are correct in saying that you cannot reuse the lesson manual. :confused:

 

Furthermore, it would seem that, without the ATS, the difference in cost between the 3rd grade curriculum and the 3rd grade reuse curriculum is a whopping $100 -- $799 rather than $899. Am I reading that right? Wow.

 

--Pamela

[wy_kid_wrangler04]

I actually think that policy would keep me from using that material though in the first place to be honest. If I can not reuse it that would not work for our family and our budget!

Edited August 10, 2011 by wy_kid_wrangler04

[scrappyhappymama]

Wow, I find that policy to be ridiculous! However, it does say that the reuse fee covers new student workbooks and online support, etc. But, if a family does not need those things, and is reusing material they've already purchased... it seems crazy not to be allowed. However, it seems they've covered themselves by saying that the books are only leased, not bought. :confused: Does that mean you should have returned it to them? I think maybe I am confused.

 

I'd have to agree with another poster that this policy would prevent me from using their materials at all. But this is coming from someone who buys most of my curriculum with an eye toward reusing for all four children: non consumable texts, e-books, reproducible booklets.

 

I'm really not sure what I'd do in your situation. Well, if it was me, the cost and the ridiculousness of the policy would have me looking elsewhere. But I suppose if the program were worth the cost for you the first time and you really wanted to use it again, then I'd feel obligated to pay. :glare:

[cloversandlions]

Throwing away perfectly good books to buy another identical set seems more morally wrong to me, than ignoring a copyright, that is...just...what?

 

Most religions don't require strict obedience to a rule that violates a greater rule or principal. It gets sticky when one rule violates another.

 

I don't have the answer for you, but I have broken certain copyright laws in the past, without feeling guilty. Throwing away that manual seems wrong to ME, very WRONG!

 

I'm afraid :iagree:with this

 

 

and

 

 

I actually think that policy would keep me from using that material though in the first place to be honest. If I can not reuse it that would not work for our family and our budget!

 

:iagree:with this.

 

My friend gave me a copy of a music CD she bought. DD and I listened to it several times, and once we decided that we'd have bought it anyway, I went onto iTunes and bought the download. I didn't *need* the download at that point, but it was the fastest and easiest way to be honest about it. When same friend gave me a copy of a movie she'd also purchased, I chose not to watch it via disk once I realized it was on Netflix streaming (so I watched it that way). I know that seems silly, but I felt better about it.

 

However, I don't see the problem with reusing curriculum within my family if it is something I purchased new, especially if it *was* reusable. There are too many trees being cut down already, IMO. What a shame that the company's policies appear to value profit over being good stewards of the earth's resources. I *would* buy new workbooks if that were an option. It sounds like it's not, really - at least, not if cost effectiveness is a consideration. Moreover, especially if my finances had changed, I could not, in good conscience, pay money I could not afford just to adhere to a copyright policy as restrictive as the one mentioned above.

 

...One question, though - when you use Calvert materials, are your children also enrolled in a school, of sorts? In other words, are you *just* talking about buying materials, or does the tuition also include other services? I can see why they'd charge more for the latter situation (even for reused materials), but as for the former, I cannot understand why the "no reuse" policy is in effect.

Edited August 10, 2011 by WorkInProgress
clarification

[SonshineLearner]

Can you call them and get permission for use for other kids within your family?

 

I am speaking JUST for myself here, but whether man knows if I do it or not, God still does and I will be held accountable. I wouldn't if you can not get permission from them. I would try to get permission though for within your own family.

 

I would check and see if that's legally binding. I don't think that they can legally obligate you to not reuse it. Perhaps not copy it :) but just not "reuse" it? I think that's just a desire.... Not a right that they have. Just a thought...

[Guest submarines]

Destroy rather than re-use? That's beyond wasteful, and I'm not comfortable with this. I wouldn't never consider such a curriculum.

[zenjenn]

I am a painfully scrupulous person but that is ridiculous. Can you imagine buying a shirt that had a "user policy" that said you couldn't pass it on to someone else?

 

I understand the legal importance of protecting information which can be freely distributed to the detriment of its authors, but I also think there are fair use laws. I'm pretty sure legally, when you purchase any publication, that COPY becomes yours to do with as you wish - to reuse, sell, or give away - just like a shirt. The law prevents you from distributing copies or using copies for yourself and then giving away the originals.

 

Same with software.. if you remove it from your own computer, the physical disks and manuals are YOURS to give, sell, or re-use as you wish, but you can't copy the disks, or keep an installed version on your computer and then give away the disks, etc.

 

The fact that Calvert would even attempt such a policy makes me question the integrity of the company. :confused: I understand they are in the industry to make a profit, but anyone who produces anything should understand there is a market for used product.

 

If Calvert is not giving you a straight answer I am guessing they know this policy is published but not legally binding? Wow.

[savmom]

Destroy rather than re-use? That's beyond wasteful, and I'm not comfortable with this. I wouldn't never consider such a curriculum.

 

 

:iagree:

 

Winter Promise has a similar policy with their instructor guides. I understand why they have the policy, but I won't buy curriculum that I could not even legally GIVE away! :glare:

[missmoe]

I would check and see if that's legally binding. I don't think that they can legally obligate you to not reuse it. Perhaps not copy it :) but just not "reuse" it? I think that's just a desire.... Not a right that they have. Just a thought...

 

 

I'm not sure it is legal. But the "leasing" wording may change that. I do know that WP's policy of not reselling their materials is not legal. Once one buys a product it is theirs to use, sell, loan, or burn if they so choose.

[Mommy2BeautifulGirls]

Can you call them and get permission for use for other kids within your family?

 

I am speaking JUST for myself here, but whether man knows if I do it or not, God still does and I will be held accountable. I wouldn't if you can not get permission from them. I would try to get permission though for within your own family.

 

 

:iagree: with this.

 

When I used Calvert K with my oldest (with the intent of using it every year), I actually made good use of the TM by making notes about what we did, her progress, the date each lesson was complete, etc. That way I didn't feel like it was a waste. And honestly, that was the year that I made the most notes about her progress. I would love to still do that, but unfortunately, I don't.

 

You CAN legally keep the TM for your own records. They used to require that you shred it or return it to them when you were finished with it.

 

And if you're reusing the course, wouldn't you want to purchase the workbooks again anyway? I believe that if you do, the TM is also included.

[NanceXToo]

I couldn't care less what their 'policy' says. As far as I'm concerned, once I buy the book, I own it, and I'll do what I want with it. That's so low on my radar when it comes to "morality issues" that there's just no way I'd lose sleep over that. I'd worry more about the ridiculous waste of paper/resources they are apparently expecting than whether I could help them make extra money at the expense of such wastefulness. Not that I use Calvert or ever would to begin with. :D

[Mommy2BeautifulGirls]

I'm not sure it is legal. But the "leasing" wording may change that. I do know that WP's policy of not reselling their materials is not legal. Once one buys a product it is theirs to use, sell, loan, or burn if they so choose.

 

Are you sure about that? I know CD- and DVD-ROMS fall under the "can't resell" policy. I don't see why books couldn't be the same if a company chose to do so.

[Dmmetler]

FWIW, I'm a curriculum developer for a company that has a fairly strict license policy. I'm not a lawyer, but I've had to go through a TON of meetings and training on intellectual property law so that I'm not infringing on the copyrights of others as I develop materials. (Very, very easy to do-especially when you're talking activities created to go with children's folk music.) I don't know about reuse within a family, but yes, if what you're purchasing is as single-user license, it's possible to restrict use of those materials to the single user who originally purchased them, for a set period of time. Our licenses are for one month at a time, currently-if you haven't paid the license fee per month, legally you CANNOT use any teaching materials provided under that license, which is ALL lesson plans and activities.

 

One of the things that I'm trying to do in my other "hat" as the early childhood coordinator for a university program, is to purge our library of any materials which would not be legal to teach without a license unless the company has a library/archives policy in place, because this licensing really isn't uncommon as far as teacher's editions of textbooks go.

 

Digital media has changed intellectual property law dramatically, and this has had applications for physical media as well. Once you could potentially scan and save a book, then pass it on, or put a CD on your iTunes and pass on the CD, it stopped mattering whether you bought a physical copy or a digital one-because essentially you bought a digital copy. The fact that most book publishers still allow their books to be transferred is not protected under law, but simply tradition that hasn't fallen by the wayside yet (and which most book publishers realize would NOT be a good thing-no, they don't get more money for used sales, loans, or library borrowing, but if you read and like one book by an author, chances are high you'll read others, and eventually end up buying some of them, or recommend them to others who will buy them, or decide you want to own a copy).

[SorrelZG]

I'm not sure it is legal. But the "leasing" wording may change that. I do know that WP's policy of not reselling their materials is not legal. Once one buys a product it is theirs to use, sell, loan, or burn if they so choose.

 

:iagree:

 

Are you sure about that? I know CD- and DVD-ROMS fall under the "can't resell" policy. I don't see why books couldn't be the same if a company chose to do so.

 

 

Actually, I believe you'll find you CAN resell them - you can't legally COPY and sell them.

 

 

There is a similar issue in the cloth diaper sewing community where it is an offense to profit from diapers sewn from a pattern without purchasing a license from the designer or otherwise getting their permission (just like with a book, you can't copy and resell the pattern and profit that way but you can profit from the sale of an item made from a copyrighted pattern). Really it's just a respect or politeness issue because there is no legal basis for it - but they will blacklist anyone who is caught exercising their legal right against the wishes of the pattern designer. There was even a designer who spent a small fortune on a lawyer chasing down such violations only to find out eventually that either the lawyer didn't even know the law or he purposely deceived her.

 

My conscience issue would be with whether I agreed to a TOS upon purchase. Is it stated somewhere that you are "leasing" and NOT "buying" the book before you pay the money?

[FiveOaksAcademy]

We live in a time where there are entirely too many excellent curriculum choices out there for me to bother with one like Calvert. They may be good, but there are plenty that don't have ridiculous restrictions like that that would be equally good or better. If I were interested in their curriculum, knowing this information would have me walking away and moving on to something that made more sense and was less wasteful.

[SorrelZG]

I don't know about reuse within a family, but yes, if what you're purchasing is as single-user license, it's possible to restrict use of those materials to the single user who originally purchased them, for a set period of time. Our licenses are for one month at a time, currently-if you haven't paid the license fee per month, legally you CANNOT use any teaching materials provided under that license, which is ALL lesson plans and activities.

 

 

I guess that is ultimately what I'm wondering - is this communicated in some way before the money is handed over? It seems like either people are paying, thinking they're buying the book itself and finding out later it's not the case or they're reading but not understanding that it's a license or lease that they're buying and that the book essentially remains the property of Calvert.

[Serenade]

I would check and see if that's legally binding. I don't think that they can legally obligate you to not reuse it. Perhaps not copy it :) but just not "reuse" it? I think that's just a desire.... Not a right that they have. Just a thought...

 

This is what I'm thinking as well. If they don't have legal grounds to stand on, you don't have to feel like you are doing something wrong. Now, if you signed a legal contract saying that you wouldn't re-use, that's a different thing all together. And software is different as well. But books and such are generally considered re-usable.

[WishboneDawn]

FWIW, I'm a curriculum developer for a company that has a fairly strict license policy. I'm not a lawyer, but I've had to go through a TON of meetings and training on intellectual property law so that I'm not infringing on the copyrights of others as I develop materials. (Very, very easy to do-especially when you're talking activities created to go with children's folk music.) I don't know about reuse within a family, but yes, if what you're purchasing is as single-user license, it's possible to restrict use of those materials to the single user who originally purchased them, for a set period of time. Our licenses are for one month at a time, currently-if you haven't paid the license fee per month, legally you CANNOT use any teaching materials provided under that license, which is ALL lesson plans and activities.

 

One of the things that I'm trying to do in my other "hat" as the early childhood coordinator for a university program, is to purge our library of any materials which would not be legal to teach without a license unless the company has a library/archives policy in place, because this licensing really isn't uncommon as far as teacher's editions of textbooks go.

 

 

I think the problem is that Calvert is not selling licenses. They make no mention of that. They mention "leasing" but mentioning that does not give it any legal standing. In fact, what they seem to use as support is copyright and that's a completely different thing:

 

Please note that when families enroll their children in Calvert School, they agree to the terms that the Lesson Manual is leased for use for teaching the enrolled student only. The Lesson Manual at all times remains the copyrighted property of Calvert School. Therefore, you agree at enrollment not to SELL, SHARE, REUSE, GIVE-WAY, COPY, or DISTRIBUTE the Lesson Manual.

 

And the things they claim you cannot do extend far beyond the copyright they actually hold. It attempts to exclude the purchaser's right to fair use. Whether buying the product or even agreeing to those terms actually means you are obligated to abide by terms that have you giving up your own rights is questionable.

 

What I think is going on is that they're attempting to reap the benefits of licencing rights without actually citing them. In doing that they're trying to make copyright into something that it isn't. I don't know if they're lazy or ignorant or both but I find it ridiculous.

 

I wouldn't hesitate to use their lesson manuals again. I'd respect their copyright but I'd also respect my property and fair use rights. If they want to enforce licencing rights then they should be hiring a decent lawyer in the field and drawing up proper agreements based on the law.

[jen3kids]

I just had a copyright issue with a different curriculum.

 

I finished with the books - workbooks with instructions written to the student, not the parent (it was for older kids). My dd had completed most of 4 books. I was cleaning out my shelves and decided I couldn't bear to through away books that had only been used once and the content was still good. So I posted them to give them away - the new owner could erase or make her own work pages. No problem, I thought.

 

Wrong. Apparently these are single use books and cannot be erased for another student, not even my own kid. I was shocked, and I guess I do understand from a financial perspective, but I think it is incredibly wasteful.

 

I will continue to buy/sell used curriculum, hopefully nothing illegal, but I'm not overly concerned about it.

[WishboneDawn]

I guess that is ultimately what I'm wondering - is this communicated in some way before the money is handed over? It seems like either people are paying, thinking they're buying the book itself and finding out later it's not the case or they're reading but not understanding that it's a license or lease that they're buying and that the book essentially remains the property of Calvert.

 

There is this just before you buy;

 

I hereby enroll my student(s) with the understanding that THE LESSON MANUAL IS LEASED ONLY AND REMAINS THE PROPERTY OF CALVERT SCHOOL, INC. I AGREE NOT TO SELL, LEND, COPY, SHARE, OR GIVE AWAY THE MANUAL, since the right to use the lesson manual is not transferable. I understand that all textbooks and supplies become the unconditional property of the students. Guidebooks accompanying enrichment courses may be retained for repeated use, but enrollment in these courses is subject to all other terms of this agreement.

 

How do they get the manual back at the end? If it's a lease, there needs to be some procedure for reclaiming their property. If you lease a car and the dealer doesn't expect you to return the car after you're done your 2 years or so of payments then it's not a lease anymore. You now have a car. What ARE the time limits on the lease for that matter. For a lease you need some kin of agreement spelling out the specifics, no?

 

All in all it all sounds legal-ish but I remain skeptical

[WishboneDawn]

I just had a copyright issue with a different curriculum.

 

I finished with the books - workbooks with instructions written to the student, not the parent (it was for older kids). My dd had completed most of 4 books. I was cleaning out my shelves and decided I couldn't bear to through away books that had only been used once and the content was still good. So I posted them to give them away - the new owner could erase or make her own work pages. No problem, I thought.

 

Wrong. Apparently these are single use books and cannot be erased for another student, not even my own kid. I was shocked, and I guess I do understand from a financial perspective, but I think it is incredibly wasteful.

 

I will continue to buy/sell used curriculum, hopefully nothing illegal, but I'm not overly concerned about it.

 

You don't have any copyright issue. You resell as you see fit. You have certain rights and they can't be taken away buy a bit of legal sounding text hidden away in the book or on a website somewhere.

[Merry]

That helps a lot. I think the reason Calvert has the lease policy is that they have educational counselors on standby to help the families if they have problems using the lesson manuals or books with the children. It costs the company money so I guess they are trying to recoup that through their "single use" policy.

I didn't have to sign anything on the lease when I bought the manuals for my other kids and I figured I would honor their conditions for the use of them. But now I'm wondering if I even still want to use their materials if they are doing what Wishbone Dawn says they might be doing.

[Stacie Leigh]

FWIW, I'm a curriculum developer for a company that has a fairly strict license policy. I'm not a lawyer, but I've had to go through a TON of meetings and training on intellectual property law so that I'm not infringing on the copyrights of others as I develop materials. (Very, very easy to do-especially when you're talking activities created to go with children's folk music.) I don't know about reuse within a family, but yes, if what you're purchasing is as single-user license, it's possible to restrict use of those materials to the single user who originally purchased them, for a set period of time. Our licenses are for one month at a time, currently-if you haven't paid the license fee per month, legally you CANNOT use any teaching materials provided under that license, which is ALL lesson plans and activities.

 

One of the things that I'm trying to do in my other "hat" as the early childhood coordinator for a university program, is to purge our library of any materials which would not be legal to teach without a license unless the company has a library/archives policy in place, because this licensing really isn't uncommon as far as teacher's editions of textbooks go.

 

Digital media has changed intellectual property law dramatically, and this has had applications for physical media as well. Once you could potentially scan and save a book, then pass it on, or put a CD on your iTunes and pass on the CD, it stopped mattering whether you bought a physical copy or a digital one-because essentially you bought a digital copy. The fact that most book publishers still allow their books to be transferred is not protected under law, but simply tradition that hasn't fallen by the wayside yet (and which most book publishers realize would NOT be a good thing-no, they don't get more money for used sales, loans, or library borrowing, but if you read and like one book by an author, chances are high you'll read others, and eventually end up buying some of them, or recommend them to others who will buy them, or decide you want to own a copy).

 

This gets so baffling for me... So I buy a curriculum and one of the things it teaches is say... to do a specific dance or learning activity to a popular song. After I sent that curriculum back, that dance has been learned. It's a part of my experience and I know it by heart. So if they have strict copyright policy, it would be illegal and therefore immoral for me to teach the little ditty to my other children as they grow or show it to my friend, another homeschooling mom or even to DO it in front of them??

Edited August 10, 2011 by Stacie Leigh

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

I'm afraid :iagree:with this

 

 

and

 

 

 

 

:iagree:with this.

 

My friend gave me a copy of a music CD she bought. DD and I listened to it several times, and once we decided that we'd have bought it anyway, I went onto iTunes and bought the download. I didn't *need* the download at that point, but it was the fastest and easiest way to be honest about it. When same friend gave me a copy of a movie she'd also purchased, I chose not to watch it via disk once I realized it was on Netflix streaming (so I watched it that way). I know that seems silly, but I felt better about it.

 

However, I don't see the problem with reusing curriculum within my family if it is something I purchased new, especially if it *was* reusable. There are too many trees being cut down already, IMO. What a shame that the company's policies appear to value profit over being good stewards of the earth's resources. I *would* buy new workbooks if that were an option. It sounds like it's not, really - at least, not if cost effectiveness is a consideration. Moreover, especially if my finances had changed, I could not, in good conscience, pay money I could not afford just to adhere to a copyright policy as restrictive as the one mentioned above.

 

...One question, though - when you use Calvert materials, are your children also enrolled in a school, of sorts? In other words, are you *just* talking about buying materials, or does the tuition also include other services? I can see why they'd charge more for the latter situation (even for reused materials), but as for the former, I cannot understand why the "no reuse" policy is in effect.

Yes is more than the materials even without ATS. You have access to educational counselors, Discovery Education, Brain Pop, and tons of video mini lessons from what I understand. Calvert does have financial aid and is a non-profit entity unlike some other places such as K12:).

[jen3kids]

You don't have any copyright issue. You resell as you see fit. You have certain rights and they can't be taken away buy a bit of legal sounding text hidden away in the book or on a website somewhere.

 

I think the issue was with the person I gave the books to erasing the answers or making her own worksheets by copying the questions from the student book.

[PentecostalMom]

If you are reusing within your own family I don't see a problem. I mean honestly how can they expect you not to use it within your family. Don't lose sleep over it at all.

:iagree: If it would make you feel better, call & ask them. I cannot see how they can possibly tell you not to use something that you bought to use within your own household.

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

That helps a lot. I think the reason Calvert has the lease policy is that they have educational counselors on standby to help the families if they have problems using the lesson manuals or books with the children. It costs the company money so I guess they are trying to recoup that through their "single use" policy.

I didn't have to sign anything on the lease when I bought the manuals for my other kids and I figured I would honor their conditions for the use of them. But now I'm wondering if I even still want to use their materials if they are doing what Wishbone Dawn says they might be doing.

 

That is your choice. Calvert does offer financial aid and has an excellent return policy as well. They are also non-profit. I only have one child who I will be signing up for Calvert:)

[BearWallowSchool]

:iagree: If it would make you feel better, call & ask them. I cannot see how they can possibly tell you not to use something that you bought to use within your own household.

 

:iagree: I wouldn't resell it though.

[zenjenn]

This gets so baffling for me... So I buy a curriculum and one of the things it teaches is say... to do a specific dance or learning activity to a popular song. After I sent that curriculum back, that dance has been learned. It's a part of my experience and I know it by heart. So if they have strict copyright policy, it would be illegal and therefore immoral for me to teach the little ditty to my other children as they grow or show it to my friend, another homeschooling mom or even to DO it in front of them??

 

Exactly! I think there is a point at which the publishers become unethical, because while it is fair and reasonable for them to protect their livelihood, there is a level of "protection" that goes into the realm of claiming ownership over thought.

 

I do believe we're in a transition here in the digital age. I do think newer individuals on the scene are realizing that the road to success in the future is to be more liberal with their distribution. Publishers are going to have to alter their business model, or be (eventually, IMO) overwhelmed by individuals who produce and self-publish materials and earn loyal readers and followers independently.

 

Case in point - think of how the costs of college texts and tuition have ballooned over the years. There is a price point at which that bubble will burst. There is only so much claim institutions (whether it is universities or publishers) can exert over thoughts, knowledge, and ideas - so much money that can be charged for access to thoughts, knowledge, and ideas before it becomes unethical. I think about academic departments where professors are *required* to use glossy color printed version 9.2 of a book on say, Calculus or basic physics. Really? Students living on shoestring budgets who are already paying inflated tuition being required to pay additional hundreds for texts containing knowledge that has been around for centuries.

 

You are already seeing instructors and students dismissing such "policy" when "policy" is no longer sane or reasonable.

 

I am happy to be a paying customer to publishers who provide quality materials, I like new materials, and I'm fortunate enough to be able to afford them. That said, I would not choose to give my business to a publisher who would try to double-dip into my pockets or deprive me of my right to pass on my used materials to someone less financially prosperous than myself.

[Dmmetler]

This gets so baffling for me... So I buy a curriculum and one of the things it teaches is say... to do a specific dance or learning activity to a popular song. After I sent that curriculum back, that dance has been learned. It's a part of my experience and I know it by heart. So if they have strict copyright policy, it would be illegal and therefore immoral for me to teach the little ditty to my other children as they grow or show it to my friend, another homeschooling mom or even to DO it in front of them??

 

For a single activity, no one cares-and, in fact, would fall under fair use guidelines under federal copyright law. But what they want to avoid (and I should state-this is NOT a homeschool publisher) is someone buying the teaching manuals only, as opposed to the consumables, which is where the company makes their money, and using them for years at a time, or teaching the program in their home music studio, not paying the fees to the company/buying consumables, and thereby undercutting those private providers who DO follow the rules. If too many people do that, the company won't be in the curriculum development business much longer-it takes a huge amount of money to develop, or even update, a currriculum and to create new materials.

 

Digital helps because it's cheaper to develop and publish online than to have to do a print version, but it's still not free. I suspect many homeschool publishers are undercutting themselves just at original publishing but because of redistribution.

[laundrycrisis]

When I read the Calvert site (I read it often, because I have Calvert lust), I understand it as you are not just purchasing materials, you are enrolling in a year of services. Some of the cost is materials that you are purchasing and are free to resell or reuse as you wish. The rest of it is services for the use of one child for one academic year. The lesson plans are part of the services part. When you enroll a younger child in a course you have previously had an older child enrolled in, you can pay the re-use fee instead of the full fee and not re-purchase the textbooks you already own. That saves you a little money. You get the consumable materials for the grade level again, and the younger child is enrolled in a year of services that goes beyond a box of materials. If I wanted a younger child to have all the services for that grade level, I would not mind paying the fee for that year. I would not think of it as buying the lesson manual again. Another copy of it would happen to come along with the services I was paying for.

 

If I didn't care about any of the services, and had the lesson plans in my house, and happened to consider lesson ideas based on the experience I gained when my older child was enrolled in that course, adapting this experience to come up with work that could be done without any of their consumables, IMO they would not ever need to know about it...and I would not feel bad about it because I would not have access to all of the services or the consumable materials since I did not pay for them.

[Jim]

Having read this thread, if I have to spend this much time wrangling with legal jargon I would never, ever, in a million years consider using their material. There is just to much available and much of it is simply excellent.

 

 

Jim

[...................]

Every single time anyone buys from Calvert they either verbally, in writing, or check a box online stating thAt they agree to the policy that the manuals are only to be used ONCE for ONE student, and the manual must be destroyed or returned upon completion of the course.

 

Their refund policy stinks too. I love Calvert but this is something I have learned with them. It's not reusable, It's not cheap, and it's not refundable either.

 

Unfortunately, I could have made more money by selling the 2nd grade curriculum that we just tried rather than returning it. Returning it, i will get about 350 of my original 850. I could have gotten 500 selling it. But since I *agreed* to the policy myself, I didn't feel that I would be keeping my word.

 

OTOH if you never used this course or used very little of it with your older child, I personally think it would be OK for you to use it now.

 

(Note: they do have a better refund policy for New users: now if you are new to Calvert you get a 38 day write in the books, use the course try it out and can still refund 100%)

 

In the end you have to do what you feel is right.

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

Having read this thread, if I have to spend this much time wrangling with legal jargon I would never, ever, in a million years consider using their material. There is just to much available and much of it is simply excellent.

 

 

Jim

 

I agree that there are many wonderful choices out there. I do think however that many curricula have some form of copyright protection with some more liberal than others. Calvert again does off services beyond the books and does offer financial aid:) Of course, it will not be everyone's cup of tea;)

[TracyR]

This is one of many things I don't like at all about Calvert. Throwing away perfectly good books? No way.

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

In regards to refund for Calvert, they have a 60 day review the curriculum policy that allows for a full refund as long as the materials are not written in which seems like a very good refund policy to me:) They also have the 39 lesson for new users refund policy as well.

Can you tell I am sold on Calvert? I only have one child though;)

[MerryAtHope]

I wouldn't do anything that violated my conscience. Check on the Calvert policy about family members. If it's as you understand it, given what you wrote, I would not reuse the material. IMO going against your own belief/conscious would not be at all worth the cost of a new material.

 

This...

 

I actually think that policy would keep me from using that material though in the first place to be honest. If I can not reuse it that would not work for our family and our budget!

 

and this. :iagree:

 

My understanding is that Calvert used to require things be returned--hence the "leasing" comments.

[Tammyla]

I used and loved Calvert, but their policy stinks. Destroying the TMs hurt, but I agreed to it and reluctantly did it.

 

passed on to any other student....

Calvert has the policy that the lesson manual is to be used by only one student but I see that many people reuse the manual for the other kids in the family or resell or buy the manuals from former users. I myself have reused a couple of lesson manuals for my youngest child who is eight years younger than my other kids. But it's a sticky issue for me as I don't feel right about it. I have an old 5th grade manual that I'd love to reuse for my upcoming fifth grader but I'm struggling with my conscience over this. Am I making too big a deal? My dh keeps saying to just reuse it and don't spend the money on buying a whole year of curriculum when I already have most of it. Is there a good reason why Calvert has this policy? I tried asking the Calvert school staff this but didn't get a straight answer from them.

[...................]

This year I will not destroy mine but save it for my evaluations, as rewriting everything we did makes no sense to me. However, I know I will not re-use it with another child without paying the re-use policy. Another option I have is to cut out the daily checklist portion, and thus keep that for my records but that would be seriously time consuming....

 

I'm sure they would get more business if they changed this policy....

[Mommy2BeautifulGirls]

:iagree:

 

 

Actually, I believe you'll find you CAN resell them - you can't legally COPY and sell them.

 

 

 

 

Not necessarily. A lot of "non-cheap" software now comes with the requirement to activate it before you can use it. If the activation code has met the maximum number of times it can be used, you can no longer use it without calling the company and confirming you are the original owner. This is to prevent the ability to resell it. Of course, with some of them, you can de-activate it from one machine and re-activate it on another. This allows you to then resell the CD/DVD, but you no longer have access to it on your computer.

[SorrelZG]

Not necessarily. A lot of "non-cheap" software now comes with the requirement to activate it before you can use it. If the activation code has met the maximum number of times it can be used, you can no longer use it without calling the company and confirming you are the original owner. This is to prevent the ability to resell it. Of course, with some of them, you can de-activate it from one machine and re-activate it on another. This allows you to then resell the CD/DVD, but you no longer have access to it on your computer.

 

Oh I didn't mean software, I meant music CDs and movie DVDs. :)

[Mommy2BeautifulGirls]

Oh I didn't mean software, I meant music CDs and movie DVDs. :)

 

Ah... well that makes sense, then! :D

 

My original post was about CD- and DVD-ROMS. :D