Jeff Garland wrote:

Christian Henning wrote:

...

Hi there, just went over the conference schedule. It looks very interesting but unfortunately I cannot make there. So, my question is if the lectures, speeches, etc. are going to be taped and available to the public, afterwards? I'm thinking of something similar to google education. I'm not sure if that is standard procedure when it comes to conferences. But heh, it's 2007!

The short answer is no. Long answer is in the archive

http://lists.boost.org/boost-users/2007/04/26848.php http://lists.boost.org/boost-users/2007/04/26825.php

Can you clarify what "IP reasons" those emails mean? - Volodya

Jeff Garland wrote:

Sure, it's "Intellectual Property". The issue is getting proper permission from all the presenters and the legalities to do that correctly. We'd probably need to consult a lawyer, write a contract, etc.

Getting a permission from a copyright holder is easy, you don't need a contract for that, just a simple "I agree..." note and a signature. IANAL, of course. But it's good enough for Boost; we don't even have the signatures of the copyright holders.

Jeff Garland skrev:

Peter Dimov wrote:

...

But it's good enough for Boost; we don't even have the signatures of the copyright holders.

Understood. But, please keep in mind that this is our first year and there are multiple things that would need to happen to be able to record and distribute all the sessions. Permissions is one. Getting gear, people, etc to record 2 simultaneous sessions is another. Distributing the sessions videos is another.

I would be very happy if it was possible to create a public wiki for the conference. Those speakeers willing to put theor presentation/slides/code on the wiki, could do so. With minimal fuss for everyone. -Thorsten

Jeff Garland skrev:

Thorsten Ottosen wrote:

...

...

Peter Dimov wrote:

...

But it's good enough for Boost; we don't even have the signatures of the copyright holders. Understood. But, please keep in mind that this is our first year and there are multiple things that would need to happen to be able to record and distribute all the sessions. Permissions is one. Getting gear, people, etc to record 2 simultaneous sessions is another. Distributing the sessions videos is another. I would be very happy if it was possible to create a public wiki for the conference. Those speakeers willing to put theor

Jeff Garland skrev: presentation/slides/code on the wiki, could do so.

With minimal fuss for everyone.

I can provide web-space on the Boost Wiki...

Thanks.

the topic of this thread was really about videotaping the presentations...

Oh, well. I'm pretty indifferent to that, but since it creates much more work for someone, it sounds like something with low priority. -Thorsten

Jeff Garland wrote:

Vladimir Prus wrote:

...

Jeff Garland wrote:

...

Christian Henning wrote:

...

Hi there, just went over the conference schedule. It looks very interesting but unfortunately I cannot make there. So, my question is if the lectures, speeches, etc. are going to be taped and available to the public, afterwards? I'm thinking of something similar to google education. I'm not sure if that is standard procedure when it comes to conferences. But heh, it's 2007! The short answer is no. Long answer is in the archive

http://lists.boost.org/boost-users/2007/04/26848.php http://lists.boost.org/boost-users/2007/04/26825.php

Can you clarify what "IP reasons" those emails mean?

Sure, it's "Intellectual Property". The issue is getting proper permission from all the presenters

Unless there's a talk given by all presenters together, you don't need permission from all of them.

and the legalities to do that correctly. We'd probably need to consult a lawyer, write a contract, etc.

Aren't you complicating things? For example, if you make available a recording of your own talk from your own website, there's very little fear that you'll sue yourself for copyright infringement. Am I missing something? - Volodya

Jeff Garland wrote:

Vladimir Prus wrote:

...

Jeff Garland wrote:

...

Vladimir Prus wrote: Sure, it's "Intellectual Property". The issue is getting proper permission from all the presenters

Unless there's a talk given by all presenters together, you don't need permission from all of them.

People want us to record all the sessions and make them available. That means collection permission from each presenter.

I'm not sure. I think having one talk recorded is clearly better than having zero talks recorded.

...

...

and the legalities to do that correctly. We'd probably need to consult a lawyer, write a contract, etc.

Aren't you complicating things? For example, if you make available a recording of your own talk from your own website, there's very little fear that you'll sue yourself for copyright infringement. Am I missing something?

Yes, you are. Presenters are free to record and upload their own presentations -- not worried about that. But, if the BoostCon conference committee makes provision to record a talk from someone that works for a large corporation, and they don't have permission to release their presentation on video, and someone at said large corporation sees it and decides its wrong, we will be sued or threatened with a lawsuit.

Why? If you just happened to lease a recording equipment to the speaker, who used it to record his talk and publish it on this personal site, you're not responsible for anything. It's just without recording equipment available, most speakers won't bother to do it themself. I see you've made up your mind that it's too much effort, which is your decision, but it's a pity anyway. - Volodya

Christian Henning wrote:

OK, in conclusion the problem is to have the equipment there and someone to record. That seems easy.

Don't assume. Who's paying? Who's recording -- need 2 people all the time to get all the sessions. Are we giving them 'free tuition' for providing the service? If you're willing to do all the work, pay for the equipment, etc to make this happen perhaps the program committee will reconsider... Jeff

on Fri Apr 13 2007, "Christian Henning" wrote:

On 4/13/07, Jeff Garland wrote:

...

Christian Henning wrote:

...

OK, in conclusion the problem is to have the equipment there and someone to record. That seems easy.

Don't assume. Who's paying? Who's recording -- need 2 people all the time to get all the sessions. Are we giving them 'free tuition' for providing the service? If you're willing to do all the work, pay for the equipment, etc to make this happen perhaps the program committee will reconsider...

I know I'm talking out of my butt, here. I was just assuming that leasing technology is a lot easier than dealing with legal issues. Maybe somebody can bring the tech. Again just suggesting. I'm not talking about HD quality, either. Taken the google edu videos they are everything but high quality.

If that's the best a company with Google's resources can provide, what do you think a nonprofit all-volunteer conference can do easily? -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com Don't Miss BoostCon 2007! ==> http://www.boostcon.com

Vladimir Prus wrote:

...

People want us to record all the sessions and make them available. That means collection permission from each presenter.

I'm not sure. I think having one talk recorded is clearly better than having zero talks recorded.

We'll see, some might be recorded. We live in a world of cheap technology -- people are running around with recording gear. That's different from the program committee taking explicit steps to ensure that all the sessions are recorded.

Why? If you just happened to lease a recording equipment to the speaker, who used it to record his talk and publish it on this personal site, you're not responsible for anything. It's just without recording equipment available, most speakers won't bother to do it themself.

I see you've made up your mind that it's too much effort, which is your decision, but it's a pity anyway.

Not just me...it's the program committee. Like Boost itself we're working with volunteer labor -- we simply don't have infinite cycles to do everything. To date we've been over-extended in my view. Jeff

I suspect the venue plays a role in people's decision to come or not. It certainly did it for me. Although I'd be terribly interested in the content of the conference, the prospect of having to fly to some other city and waste pretty much an extra day in local transportation is at the moment keeping me away. In my case I'd rather have paid a few hundred dollars more to the organization in exchange for a more accessible location. I might still come, and the decision will not be influenced in any way by knowing that recording will be available at a later stage. On making recordings available, I have a few comments: - video is problematic, requires equipment and effort and frankly doesn't add much. Unless people plan to do presentations with cheer leaders around them, that's it. - audio is almost free. At worst, the notebook from which the presentations are beamed have a microphone and can record while powerpoint wastes cycles. But it shouldn't be difficult to hook a separate computer to the conference sound mixer. And publishing slides+audio would be terrific. - if pre-registrations were good you can decide to go ahead and record the audio anyhow (for training the hotel staff and improving the quality of service, of course :-)). Copyrights and permissions can be sorted out at a later stage before pubblication. If you do record you have an option to publish, if you don't you lose the opportunity. - if you then manage to make the recording available, I think it would be very good promotion for next year conference: people know well that most of the value of a conference is in being in the same place with presenters and other practicioners. On large corporations, yes they can be bitchy for no particular reason. I use to work for one. But in general things are sorted out, especially if nobody is making money out of it. As an example, I was at the Y Combinators startup school and all presentations were recorded by multiple people. The recordings were not made by the organization, but were placed on the organization's website. One large company that does no evil asked for their presentation (both audio and slides! to be removed), but other than that everything was published (and thanks to the power of the internetS, even the removed one is still kind of floating around elsewhere, which is knowledge that might be of use in Washington these days). At least publishing slides shouldn't be a problem at all, from a legal standpoint. Most conferences publish proceedings which for large conferences (say IEEE or ACM) are made available to the public. And when I was working for large corporations nobody has ever asked me whether the conference was large or small, or whether proceedings would have been made available. It was understood that if you present things to a conference open to public registration, you were willing to disclose the material publicly. Now slides are a bit different because they may contain material that you don't necessarily want to be printed and saved for posterity (typically half-baked attempts at humor), but tutorial-style slides are probably pretty aseptic and safe. In short, it would be terrific if you could make recording available. But I understand your position. Regards, Maurizio

On Apr 15, 2007, at 8:59 AM, David Abrahams wrote:

on Sat Apr 14 2007, Maurizio Vitale wrote:

...

I suspect the venue plays a role in people's decision to come or not. It certainly did it for me.

As with any venue, for some it will be an attraction; for others, not.

Yep. That's why I said 'for me'. And even for me, the venue would have been nice: it is the combination of venue and closed airport that conjures against me coming. But the main purpose of my post was to offer a few considerations on making slides/audio available, as I'm sure the world won't notice or care whether I come or not. Regards, Maurizio

on Sat Apr 14 2007, "Christian Henning" wrote:

Telling me I'm not willing to stretch my wallet is a strong opinion or as we say in Germany - strong tobacco.

Maybe you should re-read my post. I didn't say, and never meant to imply, that any particular individual (least of all you) was unwilling to stretch anything. If the event is a big success this year maybe we'll have more sponsorship money the next time around and can offer scholarships or a reduced registration fee, or sometihng.

Maybe next year we can go Second Life. I'm willing to pay $100, or so

What does "go Second Life" mean? -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com Don't Miss BoostCon 2007! ==> http://www.boostcon.com

on Sun Apr 15 2007, "Christian Henning" wrote:

...

...

Maybe next year we can go Second Life. I'm willing to pay $100, or so

What does "go Second Life" mean?

I'm sure you have heard of the virtual Second Life platform.

I hadn't. Thanks for the link. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com Don't Miss BoostCon 2007! ==> http://www.boostcon.com

I know I cannot speak for all. But I find it hard to image that there are speakers that would mind being taped and released to the public. It such a common thing these days. Christian On 4/13/07, Vladimir Prus wrote:

Jeff Garland wrote:

...

Christian Henning wrote:

...

Hi there, just went over the conference schedule. It looks very interesting but unfortunately I cannot make there. So, my question is if the lectures, speeches, etc. are going to be taped and available to the public, afterwards? I'm thinking of something similar to google education. I'm not sure if that is standard procedure when it comes to conferences. But heh, it's 2007!

The short answer is no. Long answer is in the archive

http://lists.boost.org/boost-users/2007/04/26848.php http://lists.boost.org/boost-users/2007/04/26825.php

Can you clarify what "IP reasons" those emails mean?

- Volodya

_______________________________________________ Boost-users mailing list Boost-users@lists.boost.org http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users