I've noticed a reoccurring problem...a project gets closed but cannot be finished due to someone who does not sign off on split sheet. How about instituting a statement on the licensing agreements for a project that states after so much time has passed after a project is closed that the unsigned folks give up their rights. .. or maybe they automatically agree to percentages. IDK, but it seems a shame that a project can;t be released due to someone who might have contributed to a project leaves the site and it keeps everyone else on the project in perpetual limbo. Maybe three months....one month? Just a suggestion.
#3222 Posted Thu 19 Apr, 2018 3:29 pm
I've noticed a reoccurring problem...a project gets closed but cannot be finished due to someone who does not sign off on split sheet. How about instituting a statement on the licensing agreements for a project that states after so much time has passed after a project is closed that the unsigned folks give up their rights. .. or maybe they automatically agree to percentages. IDK, but it seems a shame that a project can;t be released due to someone who might have contributed to a project leaves the site and it keeps everyone else on the project in perpetual limbo. Maybe three months....one month? Just a suggestion.
Originally posted by tpistilli on Thu 19 Apr, 2018
Yes. An interesting conundrum indeed, Tony!
And something that has been discussed a lot behind the scenes. But I don't think there is an easy solution.
The idea of the giving up rights by default, well, not sure that would fly at all. I think we have to look at it the other way around. If I do not agree to the split-sheet (even due to absenteeism), then you cannot use my contribution - end of. If I leave the site, then I take my contribution with me. Not convenient to all those involved, but personally I believe it is the way it must work.
I think the key is in the way project owners and collaborators approach their projects. If a project is lifeless for three months, and nobody is talking, then I'd say that is the problem to be addressed. Good communications is key, in my opinion, and it is the project owner who is ultimately responsible for keeping things moving and coordinating everyones efforts.
To put it another way, if you are serious about your work, then stay on top of it and manage it like it means something to you. I see a lot of projects being started and there seems to be little or no follow up on many of them. Just post and ...... wait ... wait .... Perhaps project managers are waiting for everyone else to come running in and do all the hard grafting? I don't know! It's great when people do hear something they like and just jump in, but that's quit often not the case and if you depend on that approach then your project probably isn't going to see the finish line so often. Much better, I think, to go track down the talent you want or need and ask them to join in. Then, get it done :)
This is were reputation plays an important role too. You can see the people who are active on the site, and you know people that you have worked with. When someone new joins, or pops up out of the wood work, then you should probably be more cautious. I.e. consider the project risks and manage accordingly.
As for " perpetual limbo" - nope - just delete their part and get someone else to do it (granted, it is hard to replace certain talents!).
What I'm saying is, keep things moving. Keep communicating, and things are much more likely to get done and completed, and much less likely that you will be caught out when you try to close a project three, four, or five months later only to fined [shock|horror] my collaborators have moved on to something a bit more active.
You don't have to agree with that of course, just my view in general :) But on the other hand, there already is the possibility for a project manager to set timeliness and to make defacto ownership claims (although I still wouldn't recommend it!). That's what the project brief area is for. And if you really wanted to stick your neck out and claim ownership of someone else's contribution should they disappear, you can create a whole new custom collaboration agreement to say just that. Now, where you stand legally.. I have no idea, but would not be too confident if I were called out on it.
A better option though, is the work for hire approach. Which is actually the option that we have implemented to address this very issue much better really. This is the normal route when we want to have ownership over someone else's work and not need their permission to use it etc. They do the work, and you pay for it. You then own it, and can do whatever you like. Once their contribution is uploaded and you accept it, it is automatically transferred into your name.
Bottom line is human behavior I guess, Tony. It can be very frustrating and I certainly agree with you in principle LOL.
Great question though. And I would be very interested to hear what other think about this issue too.
And something that has been discussed a lot behind the scenes. But I don't think there is an easy solution.
The idea of the giving up rights by default, well, not sure that would fly at all. I think we have to look at it the other way around. If I do not agree to the split-sheet (even due to absenteeism), then you cannot use my contribution - end of. If I leave the site, then I take my contribution with me. Not convenient to all those involved, but personally I believe it is the way it must work.
I think the key is in the way project owners and collaborators approach their projects. If a project is lifeless for three months, and nobody is talking, then I'd say that is the problem to be addressed. Good communications is key, in my opinion, and it is the project owner who is ultimately responsible for keeping things moving and coordinating everyones efforts.
To put it another way, if you are serious about your work, then stay on top of it and manage it like it means something to you. I see a lot of projects being started and there seems to be little or no follow up on many of them. Just post and ...... wait ... wait .... Perhaps project managers are waiting for everyone else to come running in and do all the hard grafting? I don't know! It's great when people do hear something they like and just jump in, but that's quit often not the case and if you depend on that approach then your project probably isn't going to see the finish line so often. Much better, I think, to go track down the talent you want or need and ask them to join in. Then, get it done :)
This is were reputation plays an important role too. You can see the people who are active on the site, and you know people that you have worked with. When someone new joins, or pops up out of the wood work, then you should probably be more cautious. I.e. consider the project risks and manage accordingly.
As for " perpetual limbo" - nope - just delete their part and get someone else to do it (granted, it is hard to replace certain talents!).
What I'm saying is, keep things moving. Keep communicating, and things are much more likely to get done and completed, and much less likely that you will be caught out when you try to close a project three, four, or five months later only to fined [shock|horror] my collaborators have moved on to something a bit more active.
You don't have to agree with that of course, just my view in general :) But on the other hand, there already is the possibility for a project manager to set timeliness and to make defacto ownership claims (although I still wouldn't recommend it!). That's what the project brief area is for. And if you really wanted to stick your neck out and claim ownership of someone else's contribution should they disappear, you can create a whole new custom collaboration agreement to say just that. Now, where you stand legally.. I have no idea, but would not be too confident if I were called out on it.
A better option though, is the work for hire approach. Which is actually the option that we have implemented to address this very issue much better really. This is the normal route when we want to have ownership over someone else's work and not need their permission to use it etc. They do the work, and you pay for it. You then own it, and can do whatever you like. Once their contribution is uploaded and you accept it, it is automatically transferred into your name.
Bottom line is human behavior I guess, Tony. It can be very frustrating and I certainly agree with you in principle LOL.
Great question though. And I would be very interested to hear what other think about this issue too.
#3223 Posted Thu 19 Apr, 2018 4:05 pm
Yeah, I get the legal thing...nobody likes dealing with that stuff. It hasn't been a huge problem for me personally, however, I've been on a couple of collabs where it's happened. I just thought I'd throw it out there. Maybe someone else has some thoughts?
Tony
Tony
#3224 Posted Thu 19 Apr, 2018 4:11 pm
Yeah, I get the legal thing...nobody likes dealing with that stuff. It hasn't been a huge problem for me personally, however, I've been on a couple of collabs where it's happened. I just thought I'd throw it out there. Maybe someone else has some thoughts?
Tony
Originally posted by tpistilli on Thu 19 Apr, 2018
Yeah, the legal stuff will probably never hit most of us and often seems a bit pie in the sky; I just think it's more of a moral question myself.
#3225 Posted Thu 19 Apr, 2018 4:13 pm
Yanno. There's something else worth mentioning. A project can also allow for Creative Commons contributions. If someone uploads under creative commons, they can't take that back. In other words, you already have their permission to use it.
If they then vanish into thin air.. no problem :) Of course, you have to set that as a project decision in the first place. But, yeah. It's an option.. though, keep in mind that they may well be uploading their same contribution to all kinds of other projects elsewhere on the interweb too haha.. But yanno. Can't have it all!
If they then vanish into thin air.. no problem :) Of course, you have to set that as a project decision in the first place. But, yeah. It's an option.. though, keep in mind that they may well be uploading their same contribution to all kinds of other projects elsewhere on the interweb too haha.. But yanno. Can't have it all!
#3227 Posted Thu 19 Apr, 2018 4:21 pm
Oh yes, this has been a topic of discussion for a while. I completely understand your frustration, Tony - as I have dealt with this issue as well. Personally, after trying to contact collaborators 3 or 4 times to sign off on a closed project, I just delete their part(s) and find someone else to replace them.
It's a very similar situation when a person starts a project, requests 'talents needed' - then disappears, leaving multiple auditions in the wind. It's one of those things where you really can't do anything else but remove yourself from the project. As Lee mentioned, 'reputation' plays a big role in collaborating as well. So you'll know who to avoid in the future.
It's a very similar situation when a person starts a project, requests 'talents needed' - then disappears, leaving multiple auditions in the wind. It's one of those things where you really can't do anything else but remove yourself from the project. As Lee mentioned, 'reputation' plays a big role in collaborating as well. So you'll know who to avoid in the future.
#3228 Posted Thu 19 Apr, 2018 4:26 pm
Nah, no frustration here....it's just my weird tick that when there seems to be a problem, I feel the need to try to fix it....lol. It's all good.
#3229 Posted Thu 19 Apr, 2018 4:41 pm
Thanks, Tony! A light bulb just went off in my head. I think you just solved a puzzle for me!
#3232 Posted Thu 19 Apr, 2018 8:56 pm
Shannon, not sure how I helped but.....your welcome. haha
#3234 Posted Fri 20 Apr, 2018 9:31 am
