Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

Re: Fw: Important Message: SEAINT Continues on LinkedIn SEAOSC group

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
I apologize if this shows up twice, it didn't seem to go the first time.

List Members, Casey, Bill,

I think the list is a valuable resource and would hate to see it discontinued.  It raises some questions that I think many on the list are interested in.

Is there a date that the plug will be pulled on the servers that now host the list and the archives?
What is the supporting organization?  SEAINT?  SEAOSC?  SEAOC?
Is the intention that the list would be a self-supporting independent thing?
Are there plans to move the list a second time to a Linkedin SEAINT group in the future?
A search of Linkedin on May 29 shows that there are two SEAINT groups on Linkedin; SEAINT owned by Shiraz Shahid
(a development manager based in Pakistan) with 24 members, and
SEAInt-Structural Engineers Association-International owned by Williston L. Warren, IV - S.E., SECB (a structural engineer based in California) with 2 members.

As for the legal questions raised by David, who owns the copyrights on the material now?
If the list moved to Linkedin or Google, would Linkedin or Google own copyrights to the content?  If so, so what?
Would members be able to continue to post the archives to another website?

Mark Johnson PE

--- On Tue, 5/29/12, h.d.richardson <h.d.richardson(--nospam--at)> wrote:

From: h.d.richardson <h.d.richardson(--nospam--at)>
Subject: Fw: Important Message: SEAINT Continues on LinkedIn SEAOSC group
To: seaint(--nospam--at)
Date: Tuesday, May 29, 2012, 7:31 AM

Fellow engineers,
        Attached is a copy of an e-mail sent to me by my son regarding my earlier posts.
H. Daryl Richardson
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 7:26 AM
Subject: Re: Important Message: SEAINT Continues on LinkedIn SEAOSC group

Hi Dad.
There are a couple issues with what is going on here.
Firstly, the management of the list had decided that the LinkedIn forums are apropriate for their content.  This brings up some issues I haven't had time to research, such as who owns the copyrights on the material:  Some sites own what is posted there, and you wouldn't be able to continue to post your own archives on your own website.  This has implications if the forum you migrate to stops operation, while if you run your site and a distribution list you always have control:  Some costs in terms of operation, and management, but control still.
The second issue I see with retaining a distribution list, in contrast to the list management wanting to move it, is what I'm going to call Forum Fracturing:  The management will be unlikely to co-operate with an independent list (and may not even be able to within the terms of service under which you joined: they cannot give away the list.)  I saw a suggestion for Google Groups in the list as well.  What happens to the forum when some go to LinkedIn, some go to a distribution list, and some go to Google Groups?  With the supporting organization wanting to go to LinkedIn you are not simply taking over an existing distribution list, you are forming a new forum.  This is a different game, in terms of effort to run the list.  The underlying technology can be handled by a home PC (Leaving aside my personal biases about not running anything important on home grade equipment -- Use server grade systems with memory error detection and correction, RAID drives, and other things to prevent systems not being available because of a simple error) or on a co-located server, and there are several companys providing this service at a few dollars per month.
The list management should have done their Due Dilligence with regards to the Intelectual Property issues I've aluded to above, but I haven't seen their explanation to their membership of WHY they chose this route.  I'm a LinkedIn member, it is the one "Social Media" place I have a membership in online at the moment.  The site does have a different feel to is than a distribution list does.  Joining the site does require more personal information from you than joining a list does as well: while you don't have to fillin you profile there, I also haven't investigated what access you have without doing so.  Efforts to get them to expound further on why they want to make the change may be useful.
We can discuss this further, but feel free to pass this along to the list.  Just take my email address off, as I'm not monitoring it on a daily basis.
David Richardso