SfN, the major conference in neuroscience, explicitly bans any redistribution of presentations <https://www.sfn.org/annual-meeting/neuroscience-2015/at-the-meeting/communications-policies>, including photographs and recordings. Plenty of neuroscientists are unhappy with the ban on live tweeting at SfN <https://twitter.com/sfnpolice>.
I've heard rumors that these policies are reactions against results getting scooped by rogue photographers, but I don't know of any specific instance. I believe that posters and slides can be distributed by the authors after the conference, and quick search shows some SfN posters on figshare <https://figshare.com/articles/SfN_2015_Posters/1585150>. On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 4:55 PM, Tom Wright <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks Adam, > It is a medical field so protection of rare case data is the stated > problem, some presenters worry that slides are copied then reused without > attribution. I strongly feel a blanket ban is an inappropriate response and > would prefer to see guidance that presentations are given under an > appropriate licence. > Enforcement is a different matter, that I don't think has been considered. > I suspect a blanket ban would be impossible to enforce anyway which is why > I suspect licencing is a better approach. > On Feb 26, 2016 5:33 PM, "Adam Obeng" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Tom, >> >> >> Do you have a little more background? Are you talking about recordings of >> presentations by third parties, by the organisers, or by the presenter? How >> would conferences implement a ban on recording? Why do presenters not want >> to allow photos of their slides? Is it a security or confidentiality thing, >> or something else? >> >> I am not a lawyer, but copyright law that applies by default would >> probably allow the reproduction of a photo of a slide, especially if it's >> for academic purposes. Creative Commons licenses are mostly designed to be >> *more* permissive than would otherwise be the case. >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> Adam >> >> >> On Fri, Feb 26, 2016, at 05:06 PM, Tom Wright wrote: >> >> Apologies for cross posting, looks like something is messed up with my >> SWC mailing list contacts. >> >> >> I thought I would post here to elicit experiences and thoughts. >> >> The scientific society that covers my field is having a discussion about >> recording rights for conference presentations. Some people have suggested a >> policy that bans recording all together. I'm not happy with this option and >> it has got me thinking about licencing options. I would like to see a >> policy that places presentations under a formal licence such as a Creative >> Commons licence. >> Does such a licence protect the presenter from derivative copies of work, >> such as a photo of a presentation slide? >> Do other scientific organisations have policies in this area? >> >> Thanks for your expertise, >> Tom >> *_______________________________________________* >> Discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> >> http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> >> http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org >> > > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > [email protected] > > http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org >
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org
