Hi Tom,
I see, that makes sense. It sounds like it's more about attribution than reproduction. Again, not a lawyer, but as far as I know: Creative Commons licenses do mandate attribution, so in that sense they're stronger than at least US copyright law — which really doesn't have a place for moral rights like being recognised as the author of a work. But that varies seriously by country. I think Canada and most European countries do require attribution by default. In terms of enforcement, this might boil down to a nudge approach: if you remind people that their professional standards (and perhaps the law) require then to attribute, that might encourage them to do so. But someone determined to break the rules won't be deterred by that. Cheers, Adam On Fri, Feb 26, 2016, at 06:01 PM, Christian Schudoma (TGAC) wrote: > Hi, > > Just as an example for implementing a recording ban. I remember an > incident at the RNA Society Meeting 2010 in Seattle where a member of > the audience took pictures of the slides. Unexpectedly, one of the > ladies from the organiser’s team showed up (either accompanied by a security guard or not, memory’s a bit hazy there) and got the guy to hand over his smart phone so that they could be deleted. There was a complete ban on any photography or other recording of presented material, be it poster or talk and they somehow managed to watch the audience close enough to actually enforce it (mind you, we were not sitting in the main audience but somewhere on the upper levels in some corner). > > Cheers Christian > > > *From: *Discuss <[email protected]> on > behalf of Adam Obeng <[email protected]> *Date: *Friday, 26 February > 2016 at 22:32 *To: *"[email protected]" > <[email protected] > carpentry.org> *Subject: *Re: [Discuss] Licencing conference > presentations > > > 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
