Comments on: All NECC content should be shareable http://dangerouslyirrelevant.org/2008/10/all-necc-conten.html Technology, leadership, and the future of schools Wed, 08 Feb 2012 23:00:32 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Mathew http://dangerouslyirrelevant.org/2008/10/all-necc-conten.html/comment-page-1#comment-11900 Mathew Tue, 30 Nov 1999 05:00:00 +0000 http://annahein.com/2008/10/all-necc-conten.html#comment-11900 I agree. However, unless there's an agreement that all sessions will be videotaped, it is common courtesy to ask someone if it's okay to videotape them before videotaping. I agree. However, unless there’s an agreement that all sessions will be videotaped, it is common courtesy to ask someone if it’s okay to videotape them before videotaping.

]]> By: Dean Shareski http://dangerouslyirrelevant.org/2008/10/all-necc-conten.html/comment-page-1#comment-11901 Dean Shareski Tue, 30 Nov 1999 05:00:00 +0000 http://annahein.com/2008/10/all-necc-conten.html#comment-11901 Mathew, While courtesy is always good, a video camera can be seen as an extension of the eye and memory. The fact that a presenter is willing to share to 30 people in a public setting, should mean they'd be willing sharing to a potentially larger audience. I fail to see the difference or at least fully appreciate the arguments against sharing content. Mathew,

While courtesy is always good, a video camera can be seen as an extension of the eye and memory.

The fact that a presenter is willing to share to 30 people in a public setting, should mean they’d be willing sharing to a potentially larger audience. I fail to see the difference or at least fully appreciate the arguments against sharing content.

]]> By: Carl Anderson http://dangerouslyirrelevant.org/2008/10/all-necc-conten.html/comment-page-1#comment-11902 Carl Anderson Tue, 30 Nov 1999 05:00:00 +0000 http://annahein.com/2008/10/all-necc-conten.html#comment-11902 I think the problem goes beyond asking presenters to license their presentations CC. I have asked both ITEC and TIES if I can Ustream my sessions. TIES told me that because people pay to go to their conference that it undermines their ability to sell the conference if people can view sessions for free. ITEC told me they would take it to their board of directors. They have not gotten back to me yet but I have a feeling their response will be similar. In my case, I am a presenter who wants to license his presentations CC and share them with a wider audience but it is the organizations that are preventing me from doing so. I guess I could always record my presentations without the audience and publish them myself and I have done so in some cases but it would have much more impact if these organizations recognized, sponsored, and promoted this effort. I think the problem goes beyond asking presenters to license their presentations CC. I have asked both ITEC and TIES if I can Ustream my sessions. TIES told me that because people pay to go to their conference that it undermines their ability to sell the conference if people can view sessions for free. ITEC told me they would take it to their board of directors. They have not gotten back to me yet but I have a feeling their response will be similar. In my case, I am a presenter who wants to license his presentations CC and share them with a wider audience but it is the organizations that are preventing me from doing so. I guess I could always record my presentations without the audience and publish them myself and I have done so in some cases but it would have much more impact if these organizations recognized, sponsored, and promoted this effort.

]]> By: Roger Whaley http://dangerouslyirrelevant.org/2008/10/all-necc-conten.html/comment-page-1#comment-11903 Roger Whaley Tue, 30 Nov 1999 05:00:00 +0000 http://annahein.com/2008/10/all-necc-conten.html#comment-11903 I agree that the content of presentations should be in the creative commons. I also work for a school board that wants me to "protect their intellectual property." Their policy is pretty broad...I would have to have all my thoughts about a topic and did the work completely on my own time for it to be not theirs. I think this is standard boilerplate from the state school board association lawyers. Having two kids and a bank mortgage to feed, I really don't want to go too far in the sharing department. I hope that CCL would be good enough for the board. ISTE, TIES and many school boards had better be careful because sharing is why we go to these conferences. It is not hard to see where stifling the exchange of ideas is going to hurt everyone, including the "owners" of the conference. We are only going to get as good as we give. Next time I present, I'm going to use a Creative Commons License and put it right in my handout. Please consider sharing your best ideas at your next conference. I agree that the content of presentations should be in the creative commons.

I also work for a school board that wants me to “protect their intellectual property.” Their policy is pretty broad…I would have to have all my thoughts about a topic and did the work completely on my own time for it to be not theirs. I think this is standard boilerplate from the state school board association lawyers.

Having two kids and a bank mortgage to feed, I really don’t want to go too far in the sharing department. I hope that CCL would be good enough for the board.

ISTE, TIES and many school boards had better be careful because sharing is why we go to these conferences. It is not hard to see where stifling the exchange of ideas is going to hurt everyone, including the “owners” of the conference.

We are only going to get as good as we give. Next time I present, I’m going to use a Creative Commons License and put it right in my handout. Please consider sharing your best ideas at your next conference.

]]> By: Bill Fitzgerald http://dangerouslyirrelevant.org/2008/10/all-necc-conten.html/comment-page-1#comment-11904 Bill Fitzgerald Tue, 30 Nov 1999 05:00:00 +0000 http://annahein.com/2008/10/all-necc-conten.html#comment-11904 Scott, Presenters could also be proactive on this issue, and refuse to present unless their work could be released under a CC license. ISTE's stance on ownership is one of the reasons why I opted not to submit a proposal this year. What ISTE fails to realize is that NECC is a community masquerading as a conference. Vendors pay to access the community; attendees pay to access the community. Using CC licenses would extend NECC's/ISTE's reach, as more people could see what happens during the conference, but ISTE doesn't seem to get that. This attitude toward content is obvious from their webinars; if they archived the sessions and released out video transcripts, they might actually have some useful content. (Obviously, there are some simplifications here, but I'm short on time, and this is really ISTE's problem to solve, not mine. Maybe I'll blog about it later) But to get back to my original point: NECC is nothing without presenters. If a critical mass of presenters refused to participate without CC licensing, ISTE could either listen and adapt, or decline into (increasing) irrelevance. Cheers, Bill Scott,

Presenters could also be proactive on this issue, and refuse to present unless their work could be released under a CC license.

ISTE’s stance on ownership is one of the reasons why I opted not to submit a proposal this year. What ISTE fails to realize is that NECC is a community masquerading as a conference. Vendors pay to access the community; attendees pay to access the community. Using CC licenses would extend NECC’s/ISTE’s reach, as more people could see what happens during the conference, but ISTE doesn’t seem to get that. This attitude toward content is obvious from their webinars; if they archived the sessions and released out video transcripts, they might actually have some useful content.

(Obviously, there are some simplifications here, but I’m short on time, and this is really ISTE’s problem to solve, not mine. Maybe I’ll blog about it later)

But to get back to my original point: NECC is nothing without presenters. If a critical mass of presenters refused to participate without CC licensing, ISTE could either listen and adapt, or decline into (increasing) irrelevance.

Cheers,

Bill

]]>