Let me hand you over to Jay Agris for this first session in our green all room, all about copyright and online learning in a time of crisis. All right, so are you going to have our slides up or do I need to do something here? I can share your slides for you. Not a problem. Thank you. Excellent. Okay, so we've got our title sign up. Jay, shall we get started? Let's get going. Let's get started. Okay. Yeah, we have a theme tune, don't we? We do. Yes. Hi there, everybody. For those who don't know us, I'm Jane Secker. I'm a senior lecturer in educational development at City University. And I'm Chris Morris and I'm copyright licensing and policy manager at the University of Kent. So we've been kind of obsessed with copyright literacy for a while. So we've got, yes, so we're going to talk about the webinars we've been doing. But yes, so that's our theme tune, copyright waffle. So I've got the waffle t-shirt on, copyright waffle, will you have a podcast, don't we? Yeah, we do. And you've got one of our t-shirts on today. And I've got our copyright periodic table of exceptions on today. So my copyright waffle t-shirt's on the line. So I've got one last week. But yeah, we run a website, copyrighteliteracy.org, and we have been finding ways to empower people, I guess, through understanding copyright. We don't think it should be a barrier to online learning. And that's one of our sort of big things, really, that we've been really trying to tackle that sort of issue that copyrights have seen as something that's a problem and an annoyance. So we're really looking forward to telling you what we've been up to. And we're going to be joined by a last year's panel today, aren't we, Chris? Yeah, absolutely. So we'll introduce the panel in a bit. So what we're going to be talking about today, primarily focused on the webinars, weekly webinars that have been hosted by Association for Learning Technology, that we started back in March. So this is a link to the archive of all the webinar recordings. So if you want to go back, and the things we're going to be talking about, if you want to go into the detail on any of these things, that's there for you to look at another time. But we generally start with this when we've been doing these webinars. So we've got a question, haven't we, Jane, to start off with? We have, yeah. So I don't know if Martin can line up our poll. So the question we want to sort of ask you, we've been running these webinars now that it's going to be our 20th webinar, our next one coming up. So have you attended or watched the recordings of any of our webinars? We'd like to find out from people who are here in the room today. Talking to Martin, we say there's definitely a little bit of overlap, but we've been aware that perhaps we've got two different communities that it's a great opportunity to bring together. So, yeah, if you can fill in the poll, is that available for people? You can click on the poll. Yeah, so we're getting responses in. Okay, okay. Just give everyone a couple of seconds and then let's see how we're doing. Because I think that'll be helpful. I think from some of the names it would have been, it'll be a couple of people, but I think it is a different audience today. I think that's pretty much the more end. I'll just show the responses, hopefully you can see those as well, Jean. Yeah, okay, okay. So we've got one of our biggest fans here that said it was highlighted their week. But yeah, most people haven't, a couple of people have watched one or two. So that's really helpful. You've got a whole archive and treasure trove to look forward to. Absolutely. Yeah, yeah. So do have a look at some of the stuff we've been talking about, but we're going to give you a brief overview about it. So where we want to go really, I think, is to sort of just quickly kind of think a bit about copyright and online learning. Some of you might not have been thinking about it a lot. I've been thinking about it for well more than 10 years. So Copyright and E-Learning Guide for Practitioners, that first edition of the book came out in 2010. And Chris and I worked together on the second edition of the book that came out in 2016. So we've been kind of thinking about these issues for quite a long time. And I think one of the things that we're just aware of is the kind of, you know, the shift online learning and what impact that that's had on the number of questions that are coming up about copyright and whether it's kind of changed anything. So one of the things we looked at in that second edition of the book, we did some research into levels of copyright literacy. And this is our definition. So acquiring and demonstrating the appropriate knowledge, skills and behaviors to enable the ethical creation and use of copyright material. So it's not just about knowing lots about copyright law and knowing lots about how the legislation is written. Clearly there is an element of that understanding the law, but it's linked to the idea of information literacy, digital literacy, or the whole range of literacies. And this is something to understand how this actually manifests in people's practice, is really what really gets me and Jane kind of passionate about this topic. Yeah, because I think people have a sense that, oh, well, it's the law and there's right and wrong answers. And actually that isn't the case. That isn't for people who understand, you know, a bit about how copyright law works, which we'll say a little bit about today, you know, there is a lot of uncertainty and there's a lot of gray areas. So the first thing that we did in March when it became apparent that a lot of things were going to go online was think, well, we'll write a blog post. We really have our website. So we wrote this post really to sort of try and remind people of what they could do with regard to copyrights. This isn't going to be a problem. You know, there's lots of resources that you've got available. Think about open educational resources as well, but also to think a bit about what you're allowed to do under the law. Chris, do you want to tell us a bit about some of the things we talked about in that post? Yeah, so if you want to use copyright protected material in your teaching, which almost definitely you will, there are licenses that are available from the copyright owners. So they may be primary e-resource licenses, so things that a educational institution's library would subscribe to, databases, journals, e-books. But there are also collective licenses like the CLA license, the Copyright Licensing Agency that represents publishers and authors and visual artists in books and journals, and they allow copying up to a certain amount. There are times when you can get permission directly from the copyright holder if it's practical and feasible. Era, license and box of broadcast service, cover film, TV, but then we were pointing out that there's creative comments as Jane says, open educational resources. So we also wanted to point out that copyright exceptions, and here's a range of them. So these icons come from Copyright the Card Game, which is a game that Jane and I produced that we use when we do copyright training. It is actually a card. You've got the cards there, haven't you, Jane? I do, I do. What we do in our sessions is try to point out these are defences in the law that allow you to make use of copyright material without the rights holder's permission, without contact to them or without having a license. And mostly this is when the use is regarded as being fair. So what is fair? There is no definition of fair dealing in the legislation itself. Fair dealing is the concept that we have in the UK. So we pointed out really that you've got those two things. You've got licenses that allow you to use something with permission, and then there are copyright exceptions, which allow you to use material without the express permission of the rights holder. Yeah, I think we've already had a question about whether the law's actually fit for sort of online teaching. And I think one of the things that's just worth mentioning is that the law was updated in 2014. It was meant to be making it fit for teaching in the digital age. So it's a really interesting question, but it is also something perhaps we'll pick up in our panel at the second part of this session, because many of these new copyright exceptions or amended exceptions haven't actually been tested in law. So, you know, this could be the opportunity to do that, I think. And I see Emily's sharing some really useful stuff as well about some of the guidance that she's been writing about the interpretation of copyright exceptions. So what I would like to do, it's over to me for some interactivity again.  So copyright at the time of crisis is like, can you have a go at completing the answer? Try not to write anything too offensive and rude, but what do you think? We're going to give a prize for the best answer. What's the prize going to be, Chris? We think we're, given that we are all shut away from each other and nobody's playing card games, we're going to spend the lucky winner for the best answer a set of our copyright cards. I think it's an ideal thing to have at a time when, if you're in your bubble with your family, then what better than to play a card game that allows you to explore the risk-based elements of copyright in education. So has anyone got any suggestions? Do you want to pop anything in the chat? Copyright at a time of crisis is like anything, anything you can think of. What is it like? It's like, it's like a... Railings on the edge of a cliff, says Kathy. Okay. I went for a walk on the Dover Cliffs a few months back with my son and there were no railings and I almost had a heart attack. Big elephant in the room. Pan's labyrinth. Ooh. A sudden revelation. I think it's something... Trying to... Nectar, release feral cats. Maybe your shoulders. Yeah. Oh, neuter and release feral cats, not nectar them. There we are, neuter. Yes. I was thinking what, attracting the cats with nectar. Manor from heaven. 17th stick that academics will hit with. Oh, I like that one. That's a good one. Yeah. We're going to have to have a bit of a think and come up with a breath of fresh air. Vegetarian running a meat factory. Cranky. Okay. Okay, okay. I think we've got, that's it. It's time to stop your submissions. We will do a very careful analysis. These are metaphors and we will, we will do our favor. There's a, Adele's gone for a really bad pun and that's kind of caught my eye, but we can come back to that. River in Africa. Denial. Right. The things that came up in our webinar, so we've run nearly 20 of these now and we'll come to the stats later, but what we found through the discussion is there is a lot of complexity in it. And once you start getting into the law, you cannot help but look at a number of different provisions in the law which overlap and maybe contradict each other on unsure. And even, you know, Emily Hudson, who is joining us in our panel later, has put a link to her paper where, you know, the actual issue is very clearly laid out, but you will see that there is complexity in it. This is definitely the case. There's a lot of fear within the sector, within the community that they don't want to be infringing, they don't want to be seen to be encouraging it. You know, what could happen? This is something that... Can I say something there as well? Because I think it's my brilliant... Yeah, it's not fear in the kind of traditional sense, in a way. It's not like people are cowering in fear. Sometimes what it's to do with is that the people are actually just trying to kind of fly a little bit under the radar, aren't they? We talked about this. And to kind of just ignore the issue and think, I'm probably doing something wrong, but I'm probably not going to get found out. So fear is, you know, it kind of... I think it manifests its way itself in different ways.  And the final point about ownership and academic freedom, I think linking back to the point about, you know, this is the 17th stick, academics feel hit with that they pointed out. There are questions about the intellectual ownership of a scholarship and about whether this is restrictive in the way that institutional policies to try to address copyright law, do they overly restrict teachers and students in what they could do, which links to a whole load of other very emotive and contentious subjects. So those all kind of come into the mix, which I think make it, you know, it's not a straightforward thing to work through to copyright for many people. So what was the metaphor that we've got our metaphor, haven't we? Well, it's not ours, it's provided to us. We've got a metaphor. So when we're thinking about copyright, it was actually something someone said we were doing, we did quite a few pieces of research about people's experiences of copyright and somebody said that it was like being the receiver and drawer of a hot potato. And you didn't actually, you did actually... It's a real potato. It's not hot, it's not hot. It was from the fridge. I did scrape the IAs off it, though. I thought if it had IAs on it, it would look less... But anyway, that was taken by my son. So copyright Sam Morrison. Excellent. Yeah, so this has come up, actually. This idea of copyright is the hot potato, hasn't it? Whose responsibility is it? Who's going to make the decision? And nobody kind of wants to be left holding the hot potato, I think. They kind of generally seem to want to throw it on to somebody else as quickly as possible. And we've seen that quite a bit in discussions we've had, particularly in relation to film and audio visual content and whether you can stream and record that in virtual classroom or through other ways. So, yeah. But what are we going to try and do, Chris? Well, initially, because I love an extended metaphor, were we trying to tame the hot potato? We had a bit of an internal discussion within our group and our community. And I know Chris Jones from Reading isn't on the call, but he did suggest that maybe what we were trying to do is slice open the hot potato, put butter and cheese on it to make risk-based copyright decisions more palatable. So thank you for that. That's clearly a paper. That must be written. It is, yeah. So that's kind of ridiculous extended metaphor. Let's have some stats. Yeah. So the webinar started on the 20th of March. And so we've got our 20th webinar coming up next. We're giving ourselves this Friday off, so next Friday. We do them 11 o'clock. You do pretty much 11 till 12. And we've done 19 webinars. So we're averaging about 100 participants who are joining us every week. Our maximum. So we've had 136. So that's the top number that we had. I think we have quite an important announcement related to the CLA's higher education license on that day. So that was why that event was popular. Chris and I also managed to do a couple of webinars that are quite popular. Chris and I also manage a closed discussion list, which we, I think quite a lot of members of that discussion list that's called List Copy Seek have been joining our webinars. They're often the copyright specialist in the institution. And we've seen a growth in people wanting to join our mailing list. We're going to say a bit about it because it's a closed mailing list. It's open to sort of members of the sort of education community, cultural heritage, so people can come in. So essentially it's a closed list in that rights holders can't join that list. And one of the things we've done as well is we invite guests along for our webinar. So I think it would have been probably a little bit dull if it had just been the two of us to however entertaining we are with our jingles and theme tunes and things. We've had guests joining us every week, really, from all sorts of organizations. So I don't know if you want to say anything, Chris, particularly about that. I think that some of these things are unfolding dynamic situation, what's happening with this license, that license we'll talk about in a moment. And others were things that came from the community said, oh, we'd like to know more about, for example, Creative Commons. And we've got from Creative Commons to come and talk to us. So I'd say some of those are some of them may be of their time. Other ones I think would be actually really useful if people wanted to go back and see. So, you know, Bridget session on Creative Commons, particularly Kyle Courtney from Harvard University as well. And absolutely brilliant presentation that he did about US copyright and fair use, which is not what we have in the UK and also controlled digital lending, which is a way in which US libraries are making books, digitized books available in without the permission of the copyright holdups been quite controversial, but he lays it out very clearly. And also, if you go back to that episode there, you also have Emily Hudson presenting on that, I think as well. So you've got some, yeah, there's some good stuff to go back to if, you know, even if it's the other stuff is kind of of its time. So Chris, I mean, it's all been pretty serious stuff really, hasn't it? It's pretty heavy going. It's pretty heavy going. So, so this is a lot. These are some of the photos that we've shared at various points in part of this process of putting these webinars together was trying to make us feel like we were part of community and doing stuff. Yeah. Yeah. What we got some highlight. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know where to go with some of the embarrassing photos that have been there. There's some lockdown hair stuff. Yeah. Yeah. You meet me at 20. That's you in the middle there, isn't it? Yeah. That's a funny photo. There's the instant on the top left where I stood on a saw and we don't entirely remember why I was doing that, but during the cycle. So I think it's probably best if we've moved on. Well, there's another one that's equally a self-indulgent actually coming on next. So this is the fact. So, Jane, this was you wanted to put the slide in over to you. I did. I mean, I actually think that putting a bit of music and funding to the sessions has been really a quite an important part of it.  We had some singing as well, things like that as well. We definitely had a happy birthday when it's been birthday time. So that's been quite nice. And I think that that is all part of what we try to do with copyright literacy as well. So, you know, it's been, it hasn't all been copyright. Now, let's kind of go on to a slightly more serious, I guess, issue, which is this idea of holding these webinars, the idea we sort of said, opened up by default. So we actually wanted to try and shift and do something different here when we were running these sessions, didn't we? Yes, we did. I mean, we, again, as Jane says, we have a closed list. We're both dead and I are members of the committee that negotiates copyright licenses on half of the higher education sector. And those negotiations are done with a small team directly with those rights holder organisations. We, we talked to the sector to find out what things they want and what they need. But there is, you know, there's a clear separation between the negotiation discussions and the broader community conversations that we have. But in this situation, there were quite a lot of things that we needed to look at and reconsider and we wanted to get the rights holder representatives to come in and be part of that conversation. So I think we, it's come in with kind of open because in that some closed sessions as well. I mean, there was definitely need to have those discussions where people could feel free to talk about whatever they, you know, what their concerns were, what they were doing at the same time as inviting everyone in to have a constructive discussion because often copyright, particularly when we're looking at its use in application in education and in cultural heritage, there's tensions between user and rights holder communities that often mean they get into their camps and throw shots at each other across the bowels saying, you know, so-and-so's, you know, behaviour and activity is not acceptable. And we wanted to not gloss over those, but to try to come up with something constructive given the situation. Absolutely. Yeah, absolutely. So, yeah, you know, I think I will tell whether that's proved to be successful as well. But yeah, one of the, I mean, I think one of the other things that we've tried to do and I think, you know, trying to keep yourself up to date in an area like copyright can sometimes feel like quite overwhelming and quite stressful. I think like it does, you know, in this sort of whole pandemic brought this out with people feeling like they might have missed something. What's the latest that's happening with technology and how should they be doing things? But being able to sort of share copyright news is been really important in our session, isn't it, Chris? So, yes, it is indeed. Copyright news, copyright news, copyright news, copyright news, copyright news, copyright news, copyright news, copyright news. So, here's our copyright news section. Jane, tell us what's been happening over the past few weeks. So, yeah, we've been busy writing stuff. This is something that we wrote- Not just Jingles. Not just Jingles, no. The wonky blog, Will the Pandemic Force Universities to Address the Challenge of Copyright? That was a post that we wrote in June. And, you know, really to sort of say that actually at an institutional level, copyright has sort of been the thing that people haven't wanted to talk about. But will this mean it might be? And I've kind of linked to that. In the piece, we talked quite a lot about some of the kind of problems there are with getting access to content. Specifically, we've discussed these on our webinars, eBooks, and the licensing models that are available for some titles that have been particularly problematic. And we've been trying to liaise with disc collections over that, helping to collect some data about some of the problems in that area, haven't we, Chris? Yeah, absolutely. And that is related to, as I mentioned, we are on the group that negotiates the collective licenses. And the situation with the CLA license was a major topic of conversation. So we're very pleased to have James Bennett from CLA on our panel. And I think other CLA colleagues are on the call as well. And this situation, if people aren't aware of it, was that CLA's members agreed to increase the amount that could be copied under the license at the outset of the pandemic. And then this expired at the end of June. And then we've been, the webinars have been a key aspect of talking through the issues. And now CLA's membership have agreed to reinstate a copying of up to 20%. And we're sort of working through the details of how that is going to work and getting some FAQs to work because there are some relationships between the CLA license and how e-book licenses work and commercial availability, which I don't think needs to go into in huge detail here, but it's part of an ongoing conversation. But it's been quite an important thread, hasn't it? Absolutely, absolutely. Yeah. So people thinking as well about open education as well, it certainly is sort of highlighting some of the issues when our textbooks are written by academics in universities and many of them are obviously then signed over to publishers. And so we're kind of hoping that we'll have bigger conversations about this rather than just trying to fix this during this sort of crisis situation. The other topic that has really come up in the webinars a lot is in relation to film, hasn't it? And audio visual works, Chris? Yeah. So we've been talking about how do we provide audio visual resources to students who are not able to come into lecture theaters and cinemas and how's that going to work? So we've had a number of closed sessions as well as more open discussions on this. So we're working through those and also refer here to Emily Hudson's paper. So Emily wrote a paper on access to film and has come up with a set of guidelines with the legal analysis that sits behind it. And those are very much come about because of the conversations that we've been hosting and having a place for the sector to talk through these things and compare notes on what they're doing. So that's still a work in progress because institutions have to balance up those risks of what they're going to do, how comfortable they feel at doing various sort of digitization activities. And I see there's, is there a link to that paper? Emily, if you want to stick the link into your paper, that would be useful here. I think it's already at the end as well. Yeah, yeah. And other, so other topics that we also have covered over the weeks. So corporate education, how do we spread the word? How do we increase levels of corporate literacy at this time? What are people doing? How are they moving to remote teaching? Creative Commons licensing, as I mentioned. Accessibility, we had a whole session looking at digital accessibility or web accessibility regulations and the tension between that and copyright law. So you want to copy and format shift, but copyright law says you can't. What do you actually do? Printed music. There's a new license here. I've mentioned the US Fair Use presentation from Kyle. I'll skip the Kent thing because I'm going to come on to that briefly next. But we also, we did have an end-of-term copyright quiz, didn't we, at one point? We did, yeah. Yeah. Yeah, we did. Yeah. Yeah. It was a lot of fun. And I think actually there was a various huge debate around some aspects of copyright history that we apparently got wrong. Yeah. So I did have the opportunity to use the webinars to launch a strategy we developed at Kent. So this, I will not talk about this at length. Let you have a look at it. This is where we have tried to address some of these issues at an institutional level to say we are going to have informed critical conversations about how we work through copyright questions, questions about risk, and questions about open versus proprietary. So that was really a good opportunity to talk to the community about that. Yeah. So we have a question for the floor. We do. I think this is to be sort of thinking about, and perhaps we'll pick this up then in the panel. So how has copyright impacted on you or your institution during the pandemic? We would like to hear more about this. And then we're aware that we have talked very much with the copyright community who obviously are the most, you know, impacted by this. We did some really super scientific research with the Twitter poll in the last couple of days. And we sort of asked people how it was impacting on them broadly. So we were assuming that we weren't just talking to our kind of little bubble here. We were talking beyond that. And it was interesting to see that, you know, it's come out that sort of 59% are saying a lot or a fair bit. So, you know, I think in certain areas, copyrights had a big impact, particularly, and we've heard quite a bit about film and things like that. For other people, it may be a discipline-related thing as well. They've just carried on. They've been able to do the materials. Things are available, and it's not had a big impact. But we would like to hear from you as well and to sort of pick up on that. But we wanted to really just, to go over to our panel, just briefly, both of us say a few things about reflecting on the experiences since March and what it means for us. And it is kind of possibly a bit soon to be doing really deep, thoughtful reflections about this, I think. But I think it has certainly made me think how much copyright is actually a wider issue. Particularly to do with, you know, how contents made available to students and what kind of models it's made available under, whether we should be pushing towards things like open textbooks, as Melissa said. But I also think that for us, one of the things that I think we've tried to do is we were aware that people were panicking or just sort of trying to find information. And one of the roles, I think, that Chris and I have tried to play is to sort of curate content. So people could tune into our webinars and know that in an hour that we kind of get up to speed on what the latest was, you know, with regard to things like the Delay license and what was happening with other things in the community. And so, you know, there's been a sense, I think, that we've all wanted to try to be really helpful at this time and potentially overwhelming our academic colleagues. One of the things I think we tried to do is sort of sift through that and help people a little bit. So we'd be interested to know whether that is something that's successful. Chris, do you want to say anything about... Yeah, my overriding reflection is, in some ways, these webinars and going through this process and having a regular conversation within the community is something I've wanted to do for a very long time. So I've wanted to feel like we can move forward with this discussion about risk and taking a sort of mature attitude and moving away from copyright as just being seen as a compliance issue. So, in some ways, it's allowed us to do more than I thought. So it's got us out of a mindset unless we can actually get together physically in the same space. We can't move forward with these things. But I think also, I found it challenging to... Sometimes it feels a bit chaotic, but you've got lots of voices coming through. That's what I really like, Chris. Well, I quite like to kind of come up with solutions. And I think what you find when you're hosting a community discussion is, actually, you can't solve every problem. You're there hosting a discussion and trying to do what you can and move collectively forward. And you don't quite know exactly where you're going. So I think it is... Yeah, it's been challenging but rewarding. And I think it is to give a final reflection as we say, we're still going. And maybe this... Terrible cliche alert. Maybe this is part of the new normal of what we're going to end up doing, not just within our community, but generally speaking. Yeah. What we're clear about is making it sustainable. And I think that's something that Alton plays such an important role in helping us create this kind of much more active community. So to go from a closed discussion list to these weekly webinars and to kind of bring people together in this way, we want to kind of carry that on. So we'll come back to this at the end, I think, but we have put out a call for people who are involved in joining what... At the moment, we're calling the Cool Gang, which is the best acronym we could come up with for copyright and online learning. If you're interested, we've had a lot of expressions of interest and we're going to be holding a meeting in the next week or so just for the sort of founding members. So do get in touch with us. And Marty's put the link to the blog post where you can find out more about that. But I think we should go over to bring our panel in now, don't you, Chris? I absolutely agree. That's enough of us waffling on. So are we going to introduce each of our panel members or are we going to let them come on and introduce themselves in the order that they're in? I think we should introduce each one, I think, briefly. So we'll say hello to them all. So we have James Bennett, who is the head of rights and licensing of the Copyright Licensing Agency. So James has been a regular contributor to the webinars and we've been putting him through his paces in having to speak to the whole of the sector and answering their questions. So really good to have him on here. Martin Hawksy at ALT has been an absolute stalwart who has made sure that everything's been working. We've tried some experiments with things like closed captioning that's been interesting. So really good to have Martin on who's going to talk from the perspective of hosting these and what it means to the learning technology community. Lisa Boer, who is the copyright person at the University of Creative Arts, also a member of the Copyright Negotiation Advisory Committee that I mentioned that negotiates the licenses, but has been a regular participant in here. So we're really great to have Lisa's input into this as somebody working through these issues within an institution. And we found that arts-based institutions have had particular issues because of the use of things that aren't necessarily in digital format in the first place. And Dr. Emily Hudson, who is an intellectual property expert, academic at King's College London, who has again become a regular and as you've seen from the links that she's been putting into the chat, has been writing quite a lot of very helpful, very useful academic papers and guidance around this area. So thank you very much to everybody for joining us today. Can we check that your mics are all working? James? Yes. Yes, you're here? James? Yeah. Horksy? Hello. Yes. Lisa? Yeah, president. Excellent. And Emily? I am here. Oh, brilliant. They're all here. We can hear them all. So, James? Are we going to give each of our speakers we're going to go, I think, to James first and we sort of primes them with a couple of questions about their thoughts of being involved in the webinars. But just a couple of minutes each. James, if you'd like to sort of start with anything that, you know, that sort of struck you based on, you know, you have been not at every webinar but many of them, haven't you? And how are you sort of feeling about that as a new way of communicating with the community? How do you feel sometimes when we tell you we're having a closed session and you can't come in? What's going on in that room? So, James, thoughts from you? Thanks, James and Chris. Yeah, so, yeah, I was going to say I've joined as many as I could while I was allowed in. But I, you know, I do appreciate that some of them are closed sessions. And, yeah, so, yeah, you did send me some questions to sort of help structure some observations on the webinars. I mean, yeah, generally, I think that they've been really great. You know, I'm coming from an unusual position because I'm representing L.A. as a supplier of services to the community, but I'm also someone who's really interested in the interplay of exceptions and licensing. So, a lot of the discussions, even those that were particularly relevant to what I do, have been really interesting. And really helped me to understand the issues facing institutions, how, you know, how important they are, how important different things are, which we, we should come to the fore because of the crisis. And, really, you know, it is, yeah, it's like a whole new channel of engagement with some of our kind of most engaged already licensed users and people who know a huge amount about copyright. So, that's been really good. In terms of the challenges that I've faced around the webinar, it's actually quite overwhelming when you get a lot of comments and questions coming in the sidebar, but it is also really good to have, it was really good to have Jen and Chris kind of fill to them and say, you know, so I could feel like I didn't need to read the comments and questions because I was going to be asked them anyway. And it is really handy to have that kind of instant feedback. So, that was kind of challenging. And I think actually thinking about the webinar series itself in terms of what challenges to die identified out were being faced. I think something that was really struck me was the blurring of primary and secondary licensing, which I've known about for a long time, but this has kind of really brought it into focus and shown some examples of that. And it showed me really that a lot of the challenges that were faced by institutions were really around the primary access to digital content rather than secondary use of the content, which is our remit at CLA. So, sometimes it did feel that there was a feeling that CLA could solve all kinds of problems with eBooks and pricing that we couldn't really, not really our area, and these are wider issues that need to be addressed. And that's why it's good that the webinar series has had contributions from lots of other people including these collections as well, so that's really important. Yes, I think it's a really good point actually, James, because I think despite, Chris and I thinking, everyone understood how things like CLA license work. We talked a bit about this, that you have to have bought the material you want to copy under a CLA license, and it isn't meant to substitute for a primary sale. And that sort of seems to be something that is kind of a little bit mixed up, I think, sometimes in some of the discussions, isn't it? Particularly as you say around people wanting to get access to eBook content and thinking, oh, well, I could use the CLA license, because this would be a much cheaper way of doing it than me having to buy that title. So, yeah. Shall we go on to Martin? And we'll come back to our panel members if they want to say more. Martin, would you like to share any sort of reflection? So, you confidently sort of probably rather blasé said, oh, yes, of course, I'll host a webinar for you, Jane and Chris, on the 20th of March. And little did you know, you'd be entering into a strange world. Well, the back story that Jane and Chris don't actually know is, I put my hand up for that first webinar on Friday and I've been supporting Jane and Chris and panelists and attendees on the following Fridays. I don't work for all on Fridays, so I've been enjoying them so much that I've been coming in on a day. I'm not technically working for all and kind of insisting that I take the time off in the upper parts of the week. So, for me, I think it's really interesting as a learning technologist, often I think when we look at issues of content we immediately feel that anything that's got a copyright license on it isn't usable. And I think what these sessions have actually done for the people who are from the community attending these sessions is really opened their eyes in terms of what you can do with copyrighted material legally. So, the various exceptions, the paper that Emily's produced and shared is a great example of just being able to understand more of what's going on so that when you do have conversations with copyright experts within your institution you're aware of what is feasible so you can perhaps negotiate a different answer than you would originally have got. Also, I feel that as we all hopefully bring in some technologists into these conversations as well it's an opportunity for those people to share some of the solutions in terms of how you can technically write, smash material in places where you are legally able or appropriately able to share that. And also I think for ALT we have the certified membership of ALT and for those people who are interested in becoming a certified member one of the core areas is engagement with legal aspects and so I think for people interested in CMALT these sessions are wonderful professional development in terms of understanding the copyright legislation its limits and also its opportunities as well. So I look forward to spending more my Fridays in copyright webinars. I feel very honoured, I really do. Thank you very much. Yeah, we didn't know that at all so that's really great to hear. Lisa, can we go over to you? You can join in tuning in to the webinars for the participant mainly. I think you did speak at one of our webinars but what sort of reflections have you got from being involved in this? And perhaps also you might want to say something from an arts institution about copyright and the impact it might have had on the teaching that you do there. Yeah, massively. I mean the first thing I think to say is how responsive the webinars were. We had these webinars quite early on in the pandemic and that was really, really useful and supportive just to kind of say well, these are the problems that we're experiencing. How are we going to overcome these? What ways can we find to support the academic staff to support the students and kind of finding solutions collectively? And when joining the webinars, you realise what a big group we are and from that we can channel that as like one collective voice and this is what needs to change and this is what we need to maybe act on. And it gives you a little bit more confidence when you start to realise that actually that there's a lot of us out there all trying to overcome some of the same things. And then with regards to supporting teaching and particularly as an arts institution, my university is an incredibly risk-averse university. They don't like risk. But we have film studies courses we've got to deliver. One of our biggest courses is film production. They show entire films throughout the year. So it's not the case that we can just now close those courses that we can't now stop teaching on those courses. So what I found over the lockdown, I was in some meetings with some very senior leadership team members who are looking to me about, well, what are we going to do? And so that's where the support of the community and the paper that Emily wrote and all of that really helped to say, well, look, this is the research that's been done. We're going to have to start to think about risk or we're going to have to start to make those decisions. But at least I could come from a very informed position and that confidence with the exceptions particularly into some of those senior meetings I suddenly got found myself in. So it's been very good from that perspective. And we can find a way to move forward. We can find a way to make these courses happen online. That's great to hear. And I definitely echo the idea of the community coming together to develop so that we feel more confident in our decision making. Emily, last but by no means least, you've been a really important person joining us for these webinars. You've also demonstrated a very good sense of humor at times when sometimes you find things that Chris and I do make you want to cringe and run away, so that's one of your things. Okay, so I attend these sessions both in my research capacity because my role involves research into copyright law and I do a lot of work with the Glam sector and also then as an academic who is teaching at the moment and thinking about copyright law. And I guess also too, I've done some work advising people in my institution, King's College London. So I've helped develop the film studies protocols that we'll be using. So I think one of the great things about the webinar has been the opportunity to engage with stakeholders for whom my research is relevant. I've thrown in the chat a few of my publications, including my book, but I think it's really good is to take something that I think most of you will not read, but actually take out some of the key lessons and ideas and very practical things and some of the key outputs, which are much more directed towards the industry. And I think the webinars have been central to that and helping me get a sense of what people are doing, what people's concerns are, their risk aversion, their decision-making processes and so forth. So I'd really like to continue with that sort of level of engagement because I consider that this is me giving back to the sector. I mean, I'm employed to do research.  I actually want to do research which has impact and not just for ref reasons, although that's obviously in the mix. At times, too, it's quite interesting to... I feel like an insider listening to librarians and learning technologists talk about things, pitch about academics. At times I'm like, I'm an academic and now I sort of hear sort of from the other side about the sorts of ways in which dealing with academics can be challenging. It really makes me think about a lot of issues in terms of copyright management and that you've really got a challenge in decisions being made by people all over the institution and how do you manage that process so that whole idea of copyright literacy being quite relevant and what happens when an actual fact often comes down to individual academics making choices about what they're going to do. So I think those are sort of some of the key things for me. You did ask, I'll say one final thing in the prompt. Was copyright really a barrier to teaching online? And I think one of the things I just say from a personal perspective is for me it has not been. Now, and I use quite a lot of images, sound recordings, audio visual works in my teaching because when we're teaching IP law, we want to show people a lot of content. And I've really thought long and hard about exceptions. I think that there are very plausible arguments in favour of using material in online classes, particularly when they are to a closed group of students by the VLE. So I've been very comfortable in making those arguments to myself and certainly I think I'm on the record at the webinar. I am not frightened of being sued because I've got an excellent case and sometimes you need to make new laws. So I stand very confident in my position on things and I'm more than happy to talk with people about the decision-making processes I've gone through if that would be of assistance, as I said some of it is in the written outputs but I'm very keen to continue that discussion. Thanks Emily, that's brilliant. So we do have about four minutes left now so we'll invite any further questions that we have from participants. Just to let us know if there is anything but picking up on your point there Emily about making new law and you're referring to there being a test case where the arguments would be put before a court and a judge would make a decision. I get the thing that's on my mind here is it came up earlier, there was a question earlier is copyright law fit for purpose? Emily you've already said you didn't think because you think there are provisions in the law that allow you to use your teaching so you haven't seen it as a barrier. Lisa could I ask you do you think from your perspective as a practitioner someone trying to make these decisions in the room do you think there's a problem with copyright law that needs to be changed through before? I think for me it comes back to the legal exceptions and having a kind of and that's maybe with this lockdown that's the first thing I did we went back to legal exceptions and say okay in the families alongside what we're trying to do so with the case, with the film production and we're trying to replicate what they would normally show a film it's for educational purposes it's part of the course so it's about looking at those exceptions and having that confidence so I would say the copyright law is there and it is about becoming knowledgeable about those exceptions and applying it but I do think there is that element of risk that has to go hand in hand but yeah I kind of think it is about copyright enables us to do much much more than I think a lot of people think yeah Thanks for that Lisa I think so Leah has pointed out that the thing is to encourage academic colleagues to have the conversation so I think it's about building that confidence and the collaborations are going back to what was in the keynotes as well and what Dave White was talking about how many of us are collaborating I think we've seen that it's a good point James, I wonder if I can go to James and say from a rights holder perspective these conversations we've been having they suggest there needs to be changed not necessarily to copyright law itself but to the way in which we operate and the way in which you know the mechanisms that underpin this thing work Well I think it's important to see that the page called textbook published by commercial publishers wouldn't have been made if copyright wasn't there and didn't exist in the way it exists so copyright is the thing that encourages the innovation and the creation as well as potentially causing challenges when you want to reuse it in ways that haven't been envisaged when the work was published I think you know there were loads of changes made to copyright law in 2014 with the explicit intention of making copyright relevant online teaching in the digital age so you know that's been quite recent I'm sure there are things that could be looked at but you know my point is always that licensing is flexible enough to accommodate where exceptions don't work and our licenses definitely work for online teaching they're built around it we do our best to be flexible and hopefully the new extension this year will be helpful in the current climate thank you James we are running out of time and if we could just very quickly finish up Chris and I just wanted to end really with saying that this has been a great panel for us this has just been an opportunity we'd like to go out on the touring around and actually talk to people and we're hoping our journey continues Chris some people have noticed your guitars I think we want to say thank you to the panel we need to do that and everyone's going to go to the next session anyway so we're going to have a very small number of people that might stay around this time thank you to Emma, thank you to Martin Emily and to Lisa and to James for everyone for joining us it's been really useful I've got lots of links in them and they will be available thanks a lot thank you very much everyone thank you but hey we're going to do this anyway


We've just finished conducting a study in England, and this was a prospective study. So people did not have diabetes at the start, and we followed them forward in time to see who develops diabetes, and we linked that to the intake of dairy products and other foods. And a unique feature of this study, it is in the Epic Norfolk study, is that we have detailed dietary data from seven-day food diaries. Now this is quite different to the standard literature which is out there, which is all based on food frequency questionnaires. So this gave us a distinct advantage of much more detailed and comprehensive dietary data. With that, we were able to do an analysis which showed that while there was no association between total dairy products and incidence of diabetes, low-fat fermented dairy products were inversely associated with a 24% reduced risk of diabetes, and specifically yoghurt made up somewhere around 87% of the low-fat fermented dairy products, and that was associated with a 28% reduced risk of diabetes. It's possible that total dairy did not show an association because we have differences in the associations with the individual components that make up the total dairy. The fact that fermented dairy products in particular were associated with a reduced risk probably points to additional things that happened to dairy during the fermentation process. So dairy has a huge amount of nutrient density. It's a good type of food, dairy as a whole, with vitamins, minerals, possibly the good type of saturated fatty acids in terms of 15 and 17 carbon chain-length fatty acids, but additionally fermentation probably is giving us the advantage of probiotic effects that's likely to play a part. All our dietary guidelines are based on the notion that all saturated fat has adverse health effects for cardiovascular disease, but we think this work contributes towards reopening that understanding now for diabetes in terms of whether the dairy fat is different in terms of its quality and that not all saturated fat is homogeneous, and there are nuances in these sources of these dietary fats, and dairy products seem to be associated with probably good quality fat. There's evidence for this from other work, of course. No piece of work is totally new in isolation. There was some nice work from the Harvard group who had shown that trans fats that are from the rumenant products can also be beneficial. Our work adds meaningfully to the already known work on the possible protective effects of dairy products, particularly fermented dairy products, and yoghurt intake in particular as part of that for the prevention of diabetes, but we have to always preface that with no single food or food group alone works in isolation, and we must place this in the context of overall healthy diets and healthy lifestyles.


We are going to introduce an important special class of contested grammars called linear grammar. Further, we discuss even restricted class, which are useful to understand regular languages better. What are linear grammars? A C F G N sigma P S is said to be linear, if every production rule of G has at most one non-terminal symbol on its right hand size. That is, if you take any production rule A goes to alpha, then either alpha is a terminal string or it is of the form x, b, y for some terminal strings x, y and b a non-terminal symbol. Now, accordingly we call the languages generated by linear grammars are linear languages. Let us look at some examples. We have C F G's for a power k k greater than equal to 0. What is the grammar that we have introduced for this language? We have discussed like this. This grammar generates a power k k greater than equal to 0 and you can clearly see that there is at most one non-terminal symbol on the right hand side of each production rule because we said that either it is a terminal string or on the right hand side of production rule, there can be one non-terminal symbol. So, here there are two production rules. One is empty string on its right hand side and other is having A S. So, each production rule has at most one non-terminal symbol on right hand side and this grammar, this C F G that generates the language A power k k greater than equal to 0 is a linear grammar and we have introduced a grammar, context free grammar for A power n B power n and where the production rules we gave it like this. Again you see that there is at most one non-terminal symbol on the right hand side of each production rule. There are two production rules here and thus you can see the grammar what we have introduced for the language A power n B power n greater than equal to 0. For this that is also a linear grammar and hence this language is linear. Also we have introduced a grammar for A power m B power n C power m plus 1 for all m n positive I mean non-negative. So, for this the grammar what we have introduced you can clearly recollect and observe that clearly it is a linear grammar. In contrast let us consider the following C F G for the language because I ask you to work for a context free grammar for this language. For example, one can consider suppose if I consider this context free grammar for this language you can clearly see that you know S is S can be A B these production rules. This S can be A B this production rule is having two portions A and B and the portion A produces the string of the form A power n B power n and B produces B power m C power n. So, that the desired string can be the desired string can be derived through this grammar. For example, this B goes to B B C this is how it is given or you can terminate. So, this is actually following the philosophy behind the grammar which generates A power n B power n such that n greater than equal to 0 that example only thing here since we have to produce strings of the form A power m B power m plus n C power n. So, any string here you can see A power m B power m C B power n C power n that is what is the form. So, here you have two parts A power m B power n through the non-terminal symbol A you can generate and B power n C power n through the non-terminal symbol B that you can generate and if you consider the production rule S goes to A B this takes the concatenation of these two and thus this grammar and thus this grammar can generate the language A power m B power m plus n C power n m n greater than equal to 0. And if you consider this grammar for this language you see here is a production rule S goes to A B on the right hand side you have two non-terminal symbols. And thus this grammar for this language is not linear because every production rule should have at most one non-terminal symbol on the right hand on its right hand side. So, here is a production rule in which you have two non-terminal symbol on its right hand side thus this grammar is not linear grammar. Now, you can observe this point if G is a linear grammar then every derivation in G is a left most derivation as well as right most derivation. The reason why here thus there is exactly one non-terminal symbol in the sentential form of each of internal step in the derivation because every production rule has at most one non-terminal symbol on its right hand side. So, each sentential form you will have only one non-terminal symbol thus when you apply a further production rule you will be applying on it. And thus what you can understand that that is only non-terminal symbol available on its in any only one non-terminal symbol will be available in each sentential form of each step in a derivation. And thus you can treat it as first non-terminal symbol that is left most non-terminal symbol that is as well as it is right most non-terminal symbol. And thus each derivation is you can understand that it is a left most derivation as well as right most derivation. Now, we will introduce some more restrictions on this linear grammar to go further in the direction of regular grammars. And this regular grammars what we are going to introduce is essentially to give the facility to understand regular languages better because in the beginning we have already mentioned that the grammars that we are introducing here in the context of regular languages you know to understand them better we are introducing that is how we have mentioned. Now, the tool CFG how languages can be generated and all those things we have introduced and certain examples that I hope now you are familiar with. Now, the notion right linear grammar will give you the concept of regular grammars to understand regular languages better. So, now how do we define this right linear grammar a linear grammar you consider a linear grammar that means each production rule on its right hand side you will have at most one non-terminal symbol. But we put further restriction that it is said to be right linear G is said to be right linear if the non-terminal symbol on the right hand side of each production rule if it is available it should occur at the right end that is each production rule the right hand side of each production rule is a terminal string followed by at most one non-terminal symbol. That means either it is of the form a goes to x for x a terminal string or it is of the form x b where x is a terminal string and b a non-terminal symbol. That means a terminal string followed by at most one non-terminal symbol that is that is the restriction that we are considering and such linear grammar is called right linear grammar similarly one can define left linear grammars in which each production rule I mean right hand side of each production rule is of the form at most one non-terminal symbol followed by a terminal string. So, that means a goes to x or a goes to b x of this form and now again you can see the similarity between these two definitions and thus any result that I will observe for right linear grammars one can imitate to get a parallel result for left linear grammars also and in fact what we can understand what we can observe is the notion of left linear grammars is equivalent to right linear grammars what is the meaning of equivalence here, whatever is the language that you generate through a left linear grammar corresponding to the language you can construct a right linear grammar and conversely. That means for a right linear grammar whatever is the language that you have correspondent it language you can construct a left linear grammar. That is the equivalence here left linear grammars and right linear grammars are equivalent. To prove this result you Now, we will be introducing some more tools and at that time I will recollect and we will remark once again and how to understand that these two are equivalent. We will postpone the proof for the time being and let us look at some examples of right linear grammars. If you consider this context free grammar s goes to a s or epsilon you know what is the language generated by this grammar, we have discussed this for several times that is the language a power k such that k greater than or equal to 0. This is the language generated by this grammar and you can clearly see that any non-terminal symbol that is appearing and right hand side of each production rule that is appearing in the right most position of the production rule and thus you can see by definition this is a right linear grammar and the language generated by this is a power k such that k greater than or equal to 0. Now, as I have remarked that left linear grammars and right linear grammars are equivalent at least for this example. Now, I will give a left linear grammar also here to understand that you have a left linear grammar for this language. If you consider the production rule which is of the form s goes to s a or epsilon you can quickly understand that you can generate this language. Because the production rule this time what I am considering is s a or epsilon and whatever the way that I have proved that this grammar this grammar generates a power k k greater than or equal to 0 you can imitate the same and understand that this grammar also generates the same language and this is a left linear grammar. Now, let us consider this language set of all those strings for a b with odd number of a s because number of a s in x is of the form 2 n plus 1 that means there are odd number of a s I am claiming that it is a linear language. In fact, you can have a right linear grammar for this of course equivalently you can have a left linear grammar for this language. For example, you can by now you understood that what is the what is the importance of non terminal symbols in the production rules like how we are constructing the production rules to generate a particular language targeted language. So, in this connection let me just demonstrate the construction of a grammar for this language. So, if you consider a string a 1 a 2 a n as we are claiming to give a right linear grammar a production rule I will look forward is of this form or of course, a goes to x. Now, here x is a terminal string in particular I will restrict myself to a particular symbol of a alphabet. So, that way in a derivation for example, a typical derivation what it will be it will generate first a 1 then you will have some non terminal symbol let me call it as a 1 and then since as I am claiming in each step I will be generating 1 1 symbol each. So, may be a 1 a 2 then some non terminal symbol sorry a 2 and so on a 1 a 2 a n and say a n and this non terminal symbol if I terminate with m epsilon then I will have that a 1 a 2 a n. So, look here the type of production rule I am targeting a terminal string followed by at most non terminal symbol because unless a non terminal symbol is there I cannot proceed further to continue this derivation. So, in the first step I am assuming not a terminal string at least one symbol I am assuming to generate say it is a 1 and the non terminal symbol because it is in the right side of the production rule I mean right end of the production rule I will have something that is a 1 and now if I continue like this in each step I am assuming to produce 1 1 symbol each say a 1 a 2 here and so on in the n th step I am having a 1 a 2 a n with a n as a non terminal symbol here. But what is the criteria that a string to satisfy to fall in the language that is the number of a s in the string is odd number of a s in the string is odd. So, that means, as and when I am producing a in the string I should somehow remember that at least it is not the count, but at least I should be able to understand that whether that the number of a s is even or odd because the possibility is either even or odd. So, when it is in odd in number then I will give the possibility to terminate the derivation when the situation is I have produced so for even number of a s then I should take care that the derivation should not terminate. So, that should there you should have a possibility to do further continuum that is the philosophy one may observe at this point of time and thus at least I should have 2 non terminal symbols one is essentially which allows you to continue the derivation further and which will not allow you to terminate and one non terminal symbol which allows you to terminate the derivation. Let me call for the purpose o and e these are the 2 non non terminal symbols o is for the one at a particular situation I will have this non terminal symbol o in the derivation if so far I have produced odd number of a s likewise I will use e the non terminal symbol e if in the derivation if so far I have produced even number of a s. So, thus I am choosing these 2 and you understand that in the beginning of the derivation of course, I do not have anything generated that means in the beginning of the derivation that is start symbol of course, I am writing here we have we are uniformly following s. So, whatever it is here that is even number of a s the number of a s is 0. So, that means, the start symbol that means the derivation if I started e then thereafter I will continue. So, I will start with e and for example, if I have generated b for example, if I have generated b in the beginning then the situation is so far I have produced even number of a s and thus I can connect it to e here because as I have mentioned at a particular central form if I am getting e that means so far I have produced even number of even number of a s here there are 0 number of a s and thus I can have this kind of step. Suppose, if I have produced in the beginning a then since I have so far odd number of a s in the derivation we will have o here. So, let me look at the first step this way now the situation is if I have odd number of a s I have the possible I should have the possibility to terminate the derivation whereas, in case of e I should not have that means e will not be terminated that means we do not introduce the production rule e goes to epsilon sort of, but you can introduce the production rule this o goes to epsilon and now clearly you can see that I have a production rule e goes to b e because I am saying this is one step. Similarly, here e goes to a o is one production rule in this context suppose if I further continue and suppose if you have produced a then as this production rule you know indicates that you have produced odd number of a s I can have this kind of thing e goes to a o that production rule that I can use. So, the production rules so far I am let me write here e goes to b e e goes to a o these two production rules that I have and for example now when you have non-terminal symbol o and if you have produced one more a what is the possibility now you have two a s that means even number of a s and this should be indicated by giving the non-terminal symbol e in the derivation that means b a a e for example if I have produced one more a that means now this o when you are with the non-terminal symbol o in the sentential form if I produce a then I will connect this to e and if I produce b then the number of a s so far generated is not going to change and thus if there are odd number of a s then it is still odd number of a s so o goes to b o. And as I had mentioned we give the possibility to terminate o through this epsilon and we do not give the possibility e goes to epsilon because if you have e in the sentential form there the number of a s is even and we should not terminate the derivation. So, with this philosophy these are the production rules that we have discussed and you can observe that these production rules precisely generate all the strings which with all the strings which are having odd number of a s. Let me give a derivation because the production rules remember that now what is the grammar that I have to mention because I have not used as here as per our convention if I just give the production rules then s is the non-terminal symbol which is always start symbol in this context we will consider e to be the start symbol. So, the grammar g with e o as non-terminal symbols and a b as terminal symbols and a production rules and e as a start symbol this grammar with the production rules as we have written here e goes to b e or a o o goes to b o or a e or epsilon these are the production rules o goes to b o or a e or o goes to epsilon. So, these production rules if you consider the language generated by the grammar is as desired that means all those strings x in a b star such that the number of s in x is odd. So, you consider a typical derivation and observe that typical derivation which derives a terminal string and observe that that string is in this language and for every string in this language you can give a derivation in this grammar that you can observe. So, take it as an exercise exercise is to show this thing the language generated by this grammar is precisely generating those strings which are having odd number of s and now you look at here the production rules that I have obtained here every production rule has on the right side at most one non-terminal symbol and thus this is a linear grammar and moreover the non-terminal symbol that is appearing on the right side is appearing at the right end and thus you can see clearly this is. So, this question mark is your exercise and clearly this grammar g is right linear. Now, you can follow this philosophy and somehow to see that you can give a left linear grammar for this language. So, you can take this as an exercise. So, an exercise another exercise here give a left linear grammar for the language x in a b star such that number of s in x is odd. So, for the same language you can give a left linear grammar. So, we have understood that this language can be generated through a right linear grammar. Now, let us look at this theorem the language generated by a right linear grammar is regular. Now, if you recollect because what are the examples just before we have discussed this language when we have introduced regular languages through regular expressions. If you remember this language is introduced and mentioned that giving a regular expression for this language is little bit difficult and we are going to give certain tools to represent this and understand that it is a regular language. So, in this context the concept of grammar particularly the concept of right linear grammar is given here and observed that you know this language can be generated through a right linear grammar. And as we have targeted saying that grammars will be a better tool and this theorem is essentially capturing this philosophy mentioning that the language generated by right linear grammar is regular. That means from this theorem you can conclude that the language just mentioned is in fact a regular language. Of course, we have not observed through the regular expression, but that philosophy is captured through this theorem. In fact, any regular language can be generated through a right linear grammar that is what is here. Now, proof of this theorem is little bit you know involved to other we can prove it here, but it will be little bit intricate at this point of time and we will be introducing better tools to prove this theorem and you can have a very elegant proof letter. So, we will push on the proof of this theorem and of course, what is mentioned for every regular language L there exist a right linear grammar that generates L. So, that means what essentially the theorem says that the regular grammars precisely generates regular languages. Now, because this right linear grammars are generating regular languages we can now call them as regular grammars. And because of the equivalence between right linear grammars and left linear grammars we can also say that left linear grammars are regular grammars. So, regular grammars here after if I if we use the term regular grammar that is you can say it is a right linear grammar or a left linear grammar. Now, let us look at some examples that we have already observed that the regular and corresponding right linear grammars we will give. So, that you will get familiarity with this right linear grammars and thus what are the languages for which you could not identify regular expressions you may try through right linear grammars to show that they are regular languages. This you have already observed that it is regular because you gave a regular expression for this because all those strings in which a b as a substring you know this is a regular language.  So, this is a regular expression you know that represents this language and that this is a regular language. Now, if you look for a right linear grammar for this you will get the familiarity how to give a right linear grammar for a regular language. And then for regular languages if you analyze the strings and if you give corresponding right linear grammars because of the theorem you can conclude that they are regular languages. Although you do not have regular expressions you may not be able to give regular expression at this point of time. Once we prove that theorem by that by the time you will be able to give even regular expressions also. Although it may be very cumbersome to see and a tedious to write you may certainly give regular expressions for the regular languages. So, what is a right linear grammar or a regular grammar for this. If you consider these production rules because again the philosophy is the non terminal symbols should represent in a derivation what is so far generated. If you have a particular non terminal symbol in a particular sentential form in a derivation it should give you the opinion it should give you the idea that what is the string so far that you have generated. So, for this purpose here we have considered you know s and a and of course, once I say this is the grammar then s is the start symbol of that grammar. Now, these production rules because if you look at any string in this it is some x a b y for x y in with any number of a s I mean with any combination of any a s and b s that is an element of a plus b whole star. But you should have at least one a b that is what is the typical string. So, the production rules here given are essentially to produce any string with a combination of a s and b s you know that production rules should be of this form a s or b s because these production rules will generate any string with a s and b s in any combination. But once you produce a b then again you can generate any string so that is the situation here, but you should not terminate s unless you produce a b because once we have a freedom here you might be just producing b s, but you would not have produced any a b or you would have produced several a s, but you have not produced a b following to that. So, that way we should not terminate the symbol non terminal symbol a s so I do not have I should not introduce the production less goes to epsilon here rather we connect to another non terminal symbol which will be used to terminate the derivation, but that non terminal symbol I will introduce only when we have produced a b in a derivation. So, for that purpose if you have produced a b then I connect to the non terminal symbol a this non terminal symbol a now can produce any string over a b that means again these rules and this you can terminate whenever you want. So, thus these are the production rules you know if you consider you can observe that the grammar with this production rules precisely generates this language. Again here you take it as an exercise to prove that the grammar g generates the language as desired and you understand that this is a right linear grammar again because any production rule here you observe if a non terminal symbol is appearing on it is right hand side that is appearing at the right end of the production rule here or here or anywhere you see wherever the non terminal symbol is appearing on it is right hand side you have that is appearing at the right end now let us consider this grammar s goes to little a capital a little b capital s or epsilon and this a goes to little a capital s or little b capital a consider this and you can quickly see that this is a right linear grammar. And now you can think of what is the further right linear grammar what is the language associated to this grammar you can think of that and observe that that particular language that particular language because this is a right linear grammar you can understand that it is also a regular language you can think about this as an exercise and observe that the corresponding language for this grammar is regular it is easy to understand we have already discussed one similar such example. If you analyze the strings generated by this you can quickly ascertain what is the general representation of a string in the language and thus you can give the language in set well reform to understand that language is regular because it is generated through a right linear grammar.  Once it is a star here you can have f 0 and also here 0 number of a's so that means you know strings of the form a power m b power n m can be 0, but b this n the number of b's here the following b's cannot be non 0 here the number of b's should be greater than equal to 1 because b plus is used here.  So, unless you produce b unless you produce b you should not have the termination of the derivation and of course, you need not produce a's that is why the production rule s goes to b can if you use directly s goes to b in the first step you are not producing you are not going to produce any a's and after that you are going to produce any number of b's at least 1 b of course and any number of b's you can produce and terminate the derivation by producing you know b's if you want that leading a's of course, you have to use this production rule as many a's as you want and then you connect to b and then produce number of b's as required and then terminate the derivation and observe that this grammar with of course, s as a start symbol this grammar produces this language this grammar produces this language and understand that this right linear grammar is generating this regular language. Now, little more complicated example that you would not have attempted to give a regular expression for this as well the number of a's the number of a's in a string or a b is 2 mod 3 that means if you take a string and count the number of a's divided by 3 the remainder should be 2 that is what the number of a's is congruent to 2 mod 3 means this. So, let us look at giving because we may not be able to think about a regular expression for this even for this even for the earlier language that is number of a's is congruent to 1 mod 2 that means it is odd number of a's for that itself we have postponed to discuss it is regular it is similar to that, but little more even complicated. Once you take the philosophy of the previous example you can give a right linear grammar for this and hence you can observe this languages and hence you can observe the languages regular what is the previous example first let me write the previous example that is number of a's x is odd. So, this can be written as set of all x in a b star. So, I am trying to write in this form number of a's in x is congruent to 1 mod 2 number of a's in x is congruent to 1 mod 2. So, that means when you divide the number of a's by 2 the remainder is 1 that is when you call the number of a's is odd. Now, what is the present example and we know a right linear grammar for this language we have already discussed a right linear grammar for this now in the present context what we are considering the number of a's in x is congruent to 2 mod 3. So, in the previous example we have considered 2 non-terminal symbols because when you divide the number of a's the possibility of reminder either it is 0 or 1 that means either even number of a's you would have or odd number of a's you would have and that way we have considered 2 non-terminal symbols and when you are having in a sentential form O which is representing odd number of a's then you give the possibility of terminating it otherwise you are not giving that means you have to continue to produce. Similarly, here since you are dividing with 3 you can now consider and you look at number of reminders possible that is 0, 1, 2. So, among these for these 3 reminders you know you give 3 non-terminal symbols to start with may be you can call them as a 1, a 2, a 3 or a 0, a 1, a 2 to represent you know that is representing the reminder a 0 may be you call it as a 1, a 2 these are the non-terminal symbols a 0 if it is appearing in the sentential form that means I will I have produced you know I have produced the number of a's congruent to 0 mod 3 that means the reminder is 0 and when you have a 1 that means the number of a's is congruent to 1 mod 3 that means the reminder when you divided by 3 is 1 and similarly a 2 the reminder is 2. Now, in the beginning when I am starting the number of a's of course, so the non-terminal symbol a 1 should be the start symbol and if I am producing any b's I am not going to worry to count there. So, that way a 1 goes to say b a 1 similarly this sorry that this a 1 is not the start symbol because the number of a's in the beginning is a 0 I mean the number of a's will be 0 and thus the reminder will be 0. So, a 0 will be declared as a start symbol and the number of b's that we are producing in a not we are not going to count and that way this production will help you to produce as many b's as you want when you have a 1 and similarly when you have a 1 you can produce as many b's as you want similarly for a 2. So, these are the production rules which are not worried to produce I mean which are not worried to count the number of b's that you want to produce in a string and now in a sentential form say we have started with this start symbol a 0 and after finitely many steps you have produced some string x and suppose you have a 0 here as we are targeting greatly in a grammar the non-terminal symbol will always be at the right end. So, that is how I am writing this way suppose you have a not here what is the meaning of this the number of a's in x is congruent to 0 mod 3. That means, so far when you divide that you have 0 number of I mean the reminder will be 0 and the number of a's that is the meaning if you have a not now if you have produced one more a because as far as b's concerned we have already discussed about the production rules here these 3 production rules are given suppose if you want to produce a then what it should be what should it become this a not. So, since we are adding one more a the reminder will become now 1. So, thus if you are from a not if you are producing one more a then I have to connect it to a 1 and similarly if I have a 1 in this place the number of a's that are produced say let me now use this production rule and continue this derivation that is x a a 1. So, that means in x a I have you know the number of a's in x a is congruent to 1 mod 3 if you have one more a generated that means from a 1 if you want to generate one more a you have to connect it to a 2 because a 2 is representing that reminder 2 that reminder 2. So, this production rule can be introduced that way and for example, when you are at a 2 if you have produced one more a then the reminder will become 0. So, it should be connected to a not. So, along with these 3 rules we include these 3 rules along with these 3 rules we include with these 3 rules and where we have to terminate because our target is to produce all those strings in which the number of a's is congruent to 2 mod 3 whenever in a string if you have produced with this condition that means you have the non terminal symbol a 2 in that. So, this non terminal symbol a 2 can be terminated. So, the production rule or epsilon when a 2 goes to epsilon can be introduced for this purpose and thus you understand systematically that these 6 plus 6 plus 1. So, total 7 rules what is the derivation you consider you can produce any string in which the number of a's is 2 is congruent to 2 mod 3 and conversely you consider any string in which you have a's and b's and number of a's is congruent to 2 mod 3 if you consider then you can produce using you can produce that string you can derive that string in this grammar with these 7 rules. So, the grammar with these 7 rules with start symbol a not that is important here with start symbol a not can generate this language the desired language of course, here I have mentioned with a's that is a not and a is taking care of a is taking the role of a 1 and b is taking the role of a 2 because a is when I have in a sentential form when a's is appearing the start symbol that means the number of a's is congruent to 0 mod 3 that is a start symbol. So, a's is equal to a not a is equal to a 1 b is equal to a 2 you consider and this 7 rules generates this language and hence this language is regular because this is a right linear grammar and hence the language is regular. Now, let me give one more example that number of 0's in string is even if and only if number of 1's in a string is odd. So, if you consider all those strings in over 0 1 with this condition number of 0's in x is even if and only if number of 1's in x is odd. The condition itself is looking little bit complicated you can of course, what you can do you can little bit analyze this condition this this logical statement you can little bit analyze and give the appropriate conditions mean sort of primitive conditions and you may try for a right linear grammar or so called regular grammar for this to understand this is regular of course, trying for a regular expression is anyway difficult and a simple point for you is you may try for a regular grammar for this, but it will also be tedious when to analyze and understand. We will introduce even better tools to understand regular grammars further and you can understand that this is regular in future. So, in order to go in the direction of that in order to introduce a better tool to understand regular grammars we first give one representation that is called a digraph representation for this regular grammars or right linear grammars and this representation will give you the facility to understand the a better tool to think of a better tool for regular languages that is the digraph representation. So, this digraph representation I will introduce this digraph representation for a regular grammars. So, given a right linear grammar g n sigma p s we define a digraph v e where the vertex set is the non terminal symbols union with a new symbol I consider say dollar and the edge set e is formed as follows. If you take a production rule that is of the form a terminal you know a goes to x b form or a goes to x. So, when you have the production rule a goes to x b then I make the non terminal symbols a b they are vertices in the digraph I will make them adjacent you will put an r from a to b or if you have the production rule of the form a goes to x then I consider the edge between from a to the new symbol dollar. Of course, what are the r's that I am introducing here we will label them. So, this is a label digraph as a matter of fact that is labeled by whatever is the string that you have here that x will be the label of that arc. So, that is how we are defining this digraph representation for a right linear grammar. Now, let us look at an example if you consider this right linear grammar this is the digraph corresponding to that because you see s a there are the two non terminal symbols I have two nodes here s and a and a new node with dollar and whatever is the production rule that you consider accordingly the r's are introduced where s goes to a s r b s that means you have an arc from s to s labeled a of course you have another arc that means here is an essentially loop here from s to s labeled b also we are simply putting one loop here and labeling a comma b. When you connect from s to a you have the terminal string a b so that is the label of this arc from going from s to a and in a you have a loop for a and b that is how it is given and now when you have a terminal string that is only thing here that s goes to epsilon is only such production rule. So, those production rules will give you r's from that particular non terminal symbols to the new symbol dollar that is what is here this epsilon is connected to is connecting from a to dollar.  Look at for example, this digraph for a right linear grammar you can quickly say what are the corresponding production rules.  So, these are the production rules for that. So, given a digraph representation for a right linear grammar you can write the corresponding production rules also and now here one important philosophical point I will introduce which which gives you the better understanding when we are talking about a better tool for regular languages. The pass in the digraph represents derivations particularly when we are interested from the start symbol to the you know the pass from start symbol to the dollar. Now, if you consider the derivation s goes to a s that goes to a a s and goes to a a b and then that goes to a a little b corresponding to this path in the previous example you can quickly see that this is the corresponding path is the corresponding path and the concatenation of the labels on this path called labels of the path here after we may call that gives a desired string because if you concatenate a a epsilon b if you concatenate these labels that is the label of this path that you can see this is the string that you are deriving from the start symbol s in the in the derivation. So, that means the labels if you take the labels of the paths from the start symbol s to dollar that gives you this that give a corresponding to which you can of course have a derivation in the grammar and that string can be generated to the grammar. So, through this digraph representation we can understand that the pass from labels of the pass from start symbol to the dollar which are the corresponding derivation the corresponding derivation will give you the derivation for the string and conversely. So, we can easily see the correspondence between these two derivations and the paths the correspondence and you can see that this concept will give you better understanding better understanding about you know derivations through this digraph representation.