Dr. Ruby Gopal, a new faculty member in the chemistry depart-

ment, is assigned the directorship of the laboratory safety course. The course has no syllabus, and over the next 2 years Dr. Gopal writes a complete syllabus containing useful reference material, well-documented procedures, and problem sets. She publishes a website that contains all the syllabus material in a useful format. During her fourth year as an assistant professor, her chair, Dr. Brenda Latrell, tells her that her faculty contract will not be renewed. Brenda explains that the department is losing a posi- tion because of budgetary cutbacks and Ruby's position must be eliminated in order to balance the budget. Ruby is very upset but lands a new job at another university. She removes the course syllabus from the university computer and uses it in a comparable course at her new institution. The next year, Dr. Latrell decides to teach the laboratory safety course and in- tends to use Dr. Gopal's electronic syllabus. She is surprised to find it miss- ing from the university's computer. She learns that Dr. Gopal has taken all the files for the syllabus website. Dr. Gopal claims she holds the copyright and that the university can license the site from her for a fee of $2,500 per year. Dr. Latrell is angered by this and reminds Dr. Gopal that she assigned her the course directorship; thus, she considers the website as being done on a work-for-hire basis. Dr. Latrell affirms that her institution holds the copyright on the laboratory safety course website. Comment on the legalaspects of this scenario. Regardless of legal interpretation, do you consider Dr. Gopal's actions to be ethical?

Include bible reference