This post originated from an RSS feed registered with Ruby Buzz
by James Britt.
Original Post: RubyConf Video Blackouts (updated)
Feed Title: James Britt: Ruby Development
Feed URL: http://feeds.feedburner.com/JamesBritt-Home
Feed Description: James Britt: Playing with better toys
Just came across this post by Lyle Johnson, where he describes his attempts to catch a talk, and subsequent video, at RubyConf.
He was, as I bet 99% of conference attendees (myself included) were, unaware that not all talks at RubyConf would be recorded. Speakers have the option of preventing their talks from being videoed. On refection this seems to make some sense; not everyone is comfortable with live recordings (ask Chris Matthieu ; he’s asked to record my presentations at the Phoenix Ruby User group a number of times, and I always decline. I ramble.)
However, it never occurred to me at this recent RubyConf that talks would not be available; I assumed all talks were recorded as a matter of agreement with being a speaker. So I felt OK with missing one or another talk on the belief that I could catch the replay.
It’s interesting to note the reason given for not allowing the recording in question. It wasn’t discomfort; it was a desire to drive traffic to a for-pay version. That’s not a bad idea, and certainly, as Lyle points out, people should be able to find compensation for their efforts. However, this leads me to two thoughts.
First, every conference that allows speakers to opt out of being recorded should have those decisions made well enough in advance that it can be clearly stated on the schedule distributed at the conference. People attending a conference should know ahead of time if a talk will be available on video or not.
Second, all speakers should give serious consideration to not allowing their talks to be recorded, and plan on making their own, more polished version. And see if they can get a few bucks for it in the process. Oh, and if you don’t tell people in advance that you’ll be making a video available later, you might be able to drive up attendance at your talk. A big win all around, no? Well, maybe for the speakers, perhaps less so for the poor schlubs paying the conference fee and struggling to catch all the talks.
So now I have a third thought: Do not make recording optional. Make it a condition of being allowed to speak. Speaking at a Ruby conference should be seen as a privilege. I understand the opportunity value for hawking one’s products or services (and JotBot was given a plug at David’s talk), but the talk itself should not be the product. BTW, this is not a matter of OSS zealotry, but a matter of deciding what conference policies work best for the communities they serve.
(Possible 4th thought: Disallow video opt-out, and ensure that all attendees get the full videos, but allow opt-out of public video distribution. When I spoke at the first MtWest RubyConf, I was asked to sign a release form for the video of my talk. The original paperwork was pretty vague, and I insisted on explicit wording saying that the video was to be released under a Creative Commons license. It might be workable to allow speakers to select among licenses for distribution outside of conference attendees such that speakers still had an opportunity to sell (or not) a version of their talk to those who did not attend the conference. Not what I’d really like to see, though.)
Addendum
I’m fortunate to be part of the MountainWest RubyConf advisory team. The issue of video recording speakers was raised for discussion, and it was agreed that all speakers, as part of accepting an invitation to present, must agree to being recorded and having that recording made freely available under a Creative Commons license. I expect that the conference Web site will be updated with this info before too long, and it will be made clear to all speakers who are selected for the conference.
Previous Topic
