This weeks symposium was focussed around three main questions based on this weeks readings.

I found the whole Q&A style, aka the non-lecture, to be an informative and interesting way of conveying information. The deconstruction of the traditional form of a lecture really allowed for a more two-way communication, ultimately I found the symposium to be enjoyable! I know, not the normal describing word associated with the idea of a university ‘lecture’.

Through answering and exploring the three main questions, Adrian assisted my understanding of copyright laws, although I must admit that I am now 100% more terrified that I will break these laws throughout my career. I guess sometimes ignorance is bliss.

We discussed the idea of critiquing the work of others, giving an almost green light, in the eyes of copyright law. This was an interesting point and as long as we can back up our opinions with reliable information, we should be covered.

I was interested to hear that copyright infringements are often not followed up as copyright laws fall under civil law. It’s therefore often not worth the time and money to follow up these infringements.

Overall, a very interesting symposium. I hope this style of ‘lecturing’ becomes more widespread throughout the university, hopefully sometime before I graduate.