APG-L Archives

Archiver > APG > 2009-08 > 1249829411


From: "LBoswell" <>
Subject: Re: [APG] Tweeting the lecture
Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 10:50:35 -0400
References: <c89.4ca8104a.37b03659@aol.com>
In-Reply-To: <c89.4ca8104a.37b03659@aol.com>


More than flattery, it's a new form of 'word of mouth'. Word of mouth has
been around forever, at least here you can go read them for yourself, and
even talk to the originator. If there's an error than ask yourself first if
there was something in your lecture that could have led to it. If it
doesn't appear in other commentary on the lecture, then that tells you
something too. The feedback is important to any lecturer who isn't simply
arrogant (who has a take it or leave it attitude).

If we see copyright infringement at every turn, in circumstances where there
really is no effective copyright protection (I mean no way of pursuing it in
the courts because no financial loss could be proven easily), aren't we
simply crying copyright wolf ?

I wonder how many who comment on this issue have a twitter account, or have
used this? Maybe that might be the first idea, have a look at what's going
on, try it out yourself before it gets judged as either dangerous or
superficial. It's simply a new way of sharing ideas, for better or worse,
and I for one see more potential than drawbacks

Larry
----- Original Message -----
From: <>
To: <>; <>; <>;
<>
Sent: Sunday, August 09, 2009 10:25 AM
Subject: Re: [APG] Tweeting the lecture


> Perhaps Larry is saying that having content from your lecture or handout
> tweeted or reported is the utmost form of flattery. I think lecturers and
> authors are usually pleased to be quoted (implying attribution) and talked
> about, because it means someone took notice of what they said or wrote,
> and
> thought it worthy of passing it on. Obviously, the issue here is: at what
> point
> does something pass beyond reportage to theft of intellectual property.
> In
> other words, when is copyright infringed and at what point is it worth
> worrying about it. Copyright violation is theft, but it seems the
> boundaries
> between guilt and innocence are less clear than in auto theft or bank
> robbery.
>
> Jay Fonkert, CG
> St. Paul, MN
> USA
>

This thread: