Re: [tlug] Copyright and preserving TLUG presentations [was: ...How to Grok Logs]

[Raymond Wan <rwan.kyoto@example.com>]

Hi Bruno,


On Sunday, June 24, 2012 10:17 AM, Bruno Raoult wrote:
>     Think of all the keystrokes you've typed in
>     this thread...and map that to how many individual messages
>     you could of sent instead.
>
>
> To whom? I guess that for some (obvious) security reasons, there
> is no contact information (but name) on TLUG announcements...
> I checked all (and only) 2011 announcements.
> So if I understand, I should:
> 1) follow every TLUG meeting list
> 2) avoid nomikai-only parties
> 3) find speakers name for technical ones
> 4) check if the same exact name is on TLUG member's list
> 5) If yes, contact him/her (with good chance this is the
> good one)
> 6) If not, or if 5 failed, google for this name, and find a
> new good candidate.


Ok...  I think we're making a little progress finally.  :-)

We're still a bit far apart, though.  As far as I can tell, 
you are talking about the *future*; pretty much everyone 
else here is talking about the *past*.

Recall Edward's June 8th message 
[http://lists.tlug.jp/ML/1206/msg00119.html] that suggested 
you should look at what has been presented, then he can help 
you follow-up with the speaker (actually, he said "we" which 
probably implies TLUG in general...I don't know if he meant 
to volunteer himself :-) ).

While there is nothing wrong about discussing about the 
policy for future meetings, I hope you can see why it looks 
'strange' that you didn't take up on his offer.  That is 
something that you can take the first step in doing.

And, quite frankly, if you handle past documents well, 
perhaps future presenters will be easier to convince.  If 
you were to ask a future presenter to give you the 
materials, s/he might want to see what you've done and if 
there's nothing, then s/he might rather hold on to the 
permissions and wait for someone else to come along...


>     As a result, we sometimes take
>     the license attached to software for granted.
>
> I do: I did never read the license attached with "ls". And I
> never will,
> and I guess nobody did :-)


Whether or not people read it, is *is* there.


> *BUT*, to come back to presentations, if I remember, the
> name of the
> presenter (and/or writer) was on the presentation itself...
> This means there is no real risk of copying it (if writer
> considers
> somebody else could steal his work - which is current
> discussion).


A piece of software of the author or company's name which 
has no license is still a program with no license.  Having 
the author's name, birthdate and blood type :-) doesn't give 
you more rights to the software than if they were missing.

Going back to presentations...well, how is it any different?


> Another option (this is the second I propose): Having a page
> in TLUG
> with only technical presentations description, and a link to
> mail to (redirected
> for obvious reasons) to the writer??
>
> I try to find a good way, and I am not lazy.


Again, I would suggest you re-read Edward's e-mail from 2 
weeks ago.  No, it isn't *exactly* what you want...but it is 
a start...

Ray