Manual copying?

One member suggested to me that we could have a separate area for (legitimate) links to downloadable files, to prevent the steady stream of posts asking for copies of manuals.



He cited the link http://ftp.primavera.com/docs/6.1/ as an example of a legitimate download



I think it could be a good idea. I know some other forums have ’sticky’ threads which stay permanently near the top of a discussion board for things like useful links and FAQs, maybe we could start something like that?



Just a thought.

I think if we had a file-sharing facility on PP, we’d be in exactly the same situation as we are now wrt moderators having to discourage people from breaching copyright. No better, no worse.



It would however have the benefit of getting rid of the relentless ’please email me a copy’ posts in the forum.

Hi Stephan,



Went to the Bar...left again...too smokey for pregnant wife.



The problem with FTP and Peer-to-Peer file sharing (as Messr’s Napster and Pirate Bay are finding out) is just what people share.



Do we want a PP sponsored Plann-ster? I think this would be horrendous.



Of course, now that I’ve said that, I don’t have another suggestion to offer, sorry.



I think that continue to remind people, and if some-one does take exception we delete the thread (or lock it).



All the best from Doha!



D.

Overall, good work by Gary! And I agree that Rule 4 should be amended.



I also feel that it would be of HUGE benefit to have the functionality to let people provide their own files for upload as a Resource part of the site. I have several such Powerpoint files I’d be glad to share, but am not willing to email over and over again.



BTW, David, say hi to the bar/restaurant on the top floor of the Sheraton Doha for me! (I was there for three weeks in early 2001, craving a drink, and didn’t find out about the bar until my last two days!)

I agree, but I think it’s really up to PP Admin to change the forum rules.

Unless / until this happens, there is a defendable argument to say that deleting posts which don’t conflict with the rules is tantamount to censorship. Not an argument I’d make, but I’m sure someone on the site will sooner rather than later.



No need for all the apologies, by the way chaps! We’re all volunteers.

Belated apologies Gary,



Just moved home and job from Dubai to Doha, so my head is still firmly encased in nonsense.



I agree with your proposition, but I still think we need to make it clear that PP will not countenance copyright theft.



David.

Hi Gary,



Yes I think it is a good idea too and I will back you up.



I still think we should amend rule 4.



Cheers,



Dave.

Much appreciated, Steve!



G

Sorry, Gary! I read your question, but didn’t think I could have any intelligent input, so I didn’t reply. I guess I should, even if it’s to just say: "Nothing to add, but of course I’ll back you up."



Re the present case: Nothing to add, but of course I’ll back you up.



Steve

Excellent! I feel much more comfortable playing the draconian beaurocrat now I have some backup!



Cheers,

G

sorry gary, meant to reply but got sidetracked. I think it is a good idea - in the words of a former boss who regularly passed the buck ’responsibility is everything’

In the absence of any further input, I’m going to go ahead with my idea below. Wish me luck!

How about asking the original poster to confirm that copyright is not being infringed. If he’s not willing / able to, then we delete the post?



Nothing to stop him lying about it of course, but at least it gets the message out there, and makes the poster more responsible for what he’s posting.

I think we shouldmake it very clear that PP will not condone copyright theft.



We have authors of some great books on this site, earning a crust out of their labours, I’m sure I’d be upset if I was losing money out of this type of theft.



I’ve posted something similar on the forum, butcan’t find it.



Davie.

I saw a similar post as well. I read the rules carefully and came to the conclusion it is not explicitly disallowed by the current rules. It probably is against the intention of rule 4 though.



Rule 4 states: "Do not post copyrighted materials. You may quote a few sentences (as long as it is not enough to infringe on the copyright) and post a link to the original source. "



I think we should consider an amendment to rule 4 to warn against sharing or helping people to share copyrighted materials.



There is a limit to what we can be expected to do about this. In many cases we don’t know what would be a breach of copyright and what would be permissible by the publisher.

I think we need a decision from PP Admin on this one, I noticed the link and didn’t like the look of it, especially when I couldnt access the IP address in the bottom right hand corner

Wipe it out in my view!!

A member has posted links to a file-sharing site for p3 and p6 manuals. I’m assuming he doesn’t have Primavera’s permission to do so, but I can’t say for sure.

Is PP responsible for copywrite breaches posted by members? Should we delete the post?

Does this breach forum rules 3 and/or 4?



Any guidance would be greatly appreciated.



Edited: Can’t get the hyperlinky thing to work, so here the url:



http://www.planningplanet.com/forum/forum_post.asp?fid=1&Cat=8&Top=58484

I think the incessant ’please mail me a copy’ posts are really a result of the private message function being disabled.



As long as no copyright is being breached, I’m not comfortable summarliy deleting all file-sharing threads, as it is a perfectly valid form of knowledge sharing, and not against the forum rules.



So far the asking for confirmation that there is no copyright breach has been reasonably sucessful. -One poster said he wouldn’t share any more, 1 confirmed no copyright infringement, 1 I’ve deleted as no response, and there’s a few others that I’m just waiting for a week to go by without a response before I delete it.



But that’s just my opinion. I think it’s a good idea to have a standard moderating policy on this, and am happy to go with the majority on this.

I am very concerned that the site has degenerated into a place where people trade manuals which may or may not be illegal and against copyright, but what is important is that the credibility of the site is in my opinion beign lowered by this continual trail of request for literature and fewer real technical questions.



I personally would like to delete all these threads and clean up the site.



Paul E Harris

Any published work is copyrighted whether asserted or not. We should err on the side of caution IMO and discourage the free exchange of copyrighted materials.



Bernard Ertl

InterPlan Systems

Ron



Interesting question.



I have read the copyright page and the software is stated as copyright and may not be copied, altered etc, but there is no mention of a restriction on copying, reproducing the “accompanying documentation”.



Maybe it is an omission by Primavera of not specifically mentioning a restriction of the “accompanying documentation”.



Paul E Harris

Eastwood Harris Pty Ltd, Melbourne, Australia

Planning and Scheduling Training Manual & Book Publishers & Consulting

www.eh.com.au