LXD Spotlight: Dan Johnson on Copyright

LXD Spotlight

Join Jocelyn Wright, our Director of Community and Market Development, for a conversation with Dan Johnson, Learning Experience Designer, on how copyright impacts online course design.

At Six Red Marbles (SRM), we believe in continuous learning. Each member of our Learning Experience Design (LXD) team has selected an area of specialization this year to deepen their expertise and expand the value they bring to our clients. Our LXD Spotlight series highlights what our team is exploring and how those insights translate directly into client impact.

Today, I’m talking to Dan Johnson, Learning Experience Designer, about copyright. He shares why he got interested in copyright, how he coaches clients through potential copyright issues, and why fair use in the in-person classroom is so different from fair use online.

What drew you to copyright as an area of specialization?

It started with a real project problem. I was working on a higher education course build, and the faculty member wanted to use textbook content in an Articulate Rise module. This raised larger copyright questions we weren’t quite sure how to handle, which in turn led to really productive conversations about how we handle copyright as a company. I became interested in how copyright issues work from project to project, how they impact the way we scope our work, and our role in helping clients meet their goals.

Copyright is this sort of hidden undercurrent in all the work we do. It’s a factor in every project but seems to often exist in the background. Unexamined assumptions create risks, so establishing a baseline understanding for our team became a top priority. We can put ourselves in a position to help our clients navigate fair use and safeguard against copyright claims.

What’s the most surprising thing you’ve learned as you’ve explored copyright?

The most surprising thing has been how misunderstood fair use is in the world of higher education, especially for online courses. When I was a university instructor, nobody was checking my classroom content for copyright infringement at all. It simply wasn’t a part of my day-to-day classroom teaching. But for online programs, it’s a very different story.

Online content persists and can be potentially accessed beyond enrolled students. That permanence and reach change the vulnerability to copyright claims significantly. I think a lot of educators assume fair use covers all educational material, regardless of format, but legal standards aren’t the same when teaching online, and that gap in understanding is where potential risks enter the mix.

Why is it so important that our clients are attentive to copyright?

As colleges and universities pivot more and more to online learning, their learning materials are going to be much more liable to copyright claims.

The most relatable parallel for this is YouTube. Creators on YouTube get flagged for copyright infringement regularly. YouTube videos can be taken down, demonetized, or dragged into lengthy appeals processes, sometimes decided by an AI reviewer. That same dynamic is likely coming for online learning platforms.

I’d expect we’ll soon see more learning content getting taken down or challenged in the courts in the coming years, particularly given where AI is headed. I also expect we’ll see more legislation around copyright and online learning platforms. Our job is to make sure clients aren’t caught off guard if or when this happens. Being proactive about copyright isn’t just about good instructional design practice; it’s also much-needed risk management.

How do you approach conversations about copyright with clients?

Every client is different, so the first thing I do is try to understand where each client is coming from. Fair use involves very subjective criteria, and clients’ comfort level with copyright risk can vary drastically. Some clients are more risk-averse and have legal counsel reviewing everything, and others don’t seem to realize the copyright risks they are taking.

What stays consistent is our role. We aren’t telling clients what material to include or not to include. We cannot take on that liability. Our role is to learn the standards and how these rules are currently understood, then educate our clients to empower them to make the best decisions for their own interests.

At the end of the day, we’re here to be a resource and a partner to our clients.

Can you give an example of how copyright shows up in your daily work with faculty?

Recently, I had a course build where the faculty subject matter expert I was working with was reusing content from their in-person version of the same course. This happens a lot, but like I was saying, many clients don’t realize the copyright risk increases when moving into an online LMS. A lot of times faculty either don’t see reuse as an issue or don’t even realize that it could lead to an infringement claim.

In this instance, I flagged the copyright issues with the materials and said, “Hey, I know this graph has been in this PowerPoint for years, but it isn’t fair use and we can’t replicate it in a lecture video for an online course. What are the main ideas you want students to get out of this, and how can we communicate that without using this copyrighted image?” That kind of conversation is where great learning work can happen and is one of my favorite parts about being an instructional designer.

How do you work with faculty to rework course content to avoid copyright issues?

When faculty have been teaching with certain materials for years, those materials feel essential, and I want to respect that attachment. While sometimes it’s easier to start a course build from scratch to review everything for copyright, many times our faculty are coming to us with materials they know well and love teaching with. It’s a different conversation.

My approach is to listen and redirect toward purpose. What’s the goal of this particular piece of content? What are you trying to accomplish with this material? Do we need this specific copyrighted material to achieve that goal? Nine times out of ten, the answer is no, and from there we can find creative alternatives. Finding visually compelling and legally sound alternatives that still meet the learning objective is a satisfying challenge and one we can help faculty embrace.

Where else does copyright impact your work?

Right now, AI is probably the biggest open question in copyright, and it touches our work in many ways. The Supreme Court ruled that meaningful human intervention is needed for material to be eligible for copyright protection. Anything generated solely by AI cannot be copyrighted.

This still leaves some gray areas, including larger questions about the copyrighted material that was used to train large language models. Notably, a group of large book publishers recently joined together to sue Meta, claiming copyrighted material was used to train Meta’s AI model. The ruling of this case could set a very interesting precedent for the future of instructional design, especially as we continue integrating AI tools into our work.

“Right now, there’s a lot of ambiguity and very little settled law when it comes to AI and copyright. It’s the Wild West in a lot of ways.”
— Dan Johnson, Learning Experience Designer

I think we’re about to see substantial litigation and likely new legislation that could reshape copyright in ways that directly affect instructional design practice. In the face of so much uncertainty and developing guidance, all we can do is stay educated, doing our best to keep our clients informed and our design practices in line with the current law.

What are you focused on right now?

My main focus right now is a practical document that maps copyright considerations onto each phase of the ADDIE model, from Analysis and Design through to the final Evaluation phase. Copyright isn’t something that shows up only at the beginning or end of a project; it’s embedded into decisions we’re making throughout the instructional design process. I want to make that visible.

That document is part of a larger handbook I’m working on, which is less about specific rules and laws and more about creating the right conversations about copyright with our clients. At the end of the day, our clients own the liability for copyright claims, so our job is to be informed enough so we can be reliable partners for them. By building a solid knowledge base within our instructional design team, we can prepare clients to make confident, well-informed decisions about their materials. That kind of strategic partnership both future-proofs the content and creates strong relationships every step of the way.

Thank you so much for chatting with me, Dan!