Training, Trainers and Copyright
Periodically there have been conversations about the copyright of training and coaching materials. Occasionally the conversations have gotten heated, particularly when someone professes an extreme view of the value of copyrights in principle. Here’s a post where I respond to a particular person (who seems to have failed badly in training and business).
Except for the fact that this seems also factually incorrect, there’s
some good stuff here.
> Sorry to be the dissenter but I have a word on the nonsense of
> copyrighting trainer’s extremely valuable thoughts. To become so arrogant
> and pious in thinking that YOUR thoughts are so valuable is utter
> stupidity (I call it an inflated self-ego).
Factual problem. Copyright is not about thoughts, so that kind of invalidates any comments based on this assumption.
Next, my thought and material ARE valuable, not by my judgment but by the judgements of those willing to pay for them, including my articles, books, etc.
The reason I have basically doubled my business revenue in the past year is that I kept ALL the copyrights to my magazine articles and materials, and can continue to earn money from them.
So, the value isn’t determined but what I think but what others think, and thank you very much, but since MY work has ongoing value for which I get checks each month, if you steal the and reduce that value (and break the law) you might suffer the consequences.
>The belief that “intellectual
> property” has value beyond comprehension shows the lack of understanding
> of evolution of thought. New ideas and creativity bring about an evolution
> of thought. The evolution of human thought yields new approaches and thus
> new material and new technologies and methods in the training room.
I agree in a sense. However, if someone should want to purchase my entire inventory of intellectual property including books and articles and websites, they would be refused if their offer was less than 1,000,000
dollars, because quite frankly, that’s a reasonable value for the existing work over my lifetime which I expect to realize. In practice, I have asked for more than that (I don’t want to sell but figure if someone’s nutty enough…I’ll ask for six mil.).
>
> The opposite is also true. The reason I make an above average living in
> the training and development field is because of the lack of evolutionary
> thinking among professionals in our field. People are sick of going
> through the same (copyrighted) cruddy courses over and over.
On this we agree a zillion percent. I only do original stuff…stuff I’ve created which is at least somewhat unique in content. Which is why I’m doing more speaking, because I bring something different to the
table that people generally haven’t heard before.
It’s also the reason I pay almost no attention to what other trainers do, not because its poor (though much of it is), but because it isn’t real competition. I get hired for my ideas, material, but above all for ME. People can (and have) used my books to design courses (which is probably fairly honest research in most cases). But they don’t have the essential piece which is me up there. It’s not that I’m a great trainer…it’s that I developed the material, and I understand MY material better than anyone else on the face of the earth, and that makes a huge difference.
>The same-ole
> tired boring management and leadership models are still being dumped on
> poor managers today. The management classes of the 70s are no different
> from sessions today. Maybe an activity or two has changed but the same
> stuff. WHY? Because training developers are so worried about their
> turf…I call it scarcity thinking.
Agreed. Also, I am always moving on. For example, I wrote Performance Management A Briefcase Book about two years ago. As far as I am concerned, while the book may be wonderful (or not), I’ve moved way beyond it and am working on a really new approach to the whole thing (which I’m speaking on in NY in May).
>
> Scarcity thinking says, “Oh my God, someone stole a thought I had back in
> 1960!” If I didn’t have an evolutionary idea in 10 years I would also be
> concerned someone would steal my one thought.
Again, I agree. But I think you are missing some points here. I take a very strong stand on copyright issues, not because I am worried about competition (if so I’d never write another book or article), but because of
what’s RIGHT, ethical and moral (and legal).
If I create something I have the right to control it’s use. I have the right to say no, or yes. I have the right to charge or not. I often say yes, and I often don’t charge, but that doesn’t change the fact it is MY right in
law and ethically. And if you make money out of stealing my work, then if I find you, I’ll at least attempt to rectify the situation.
…as would my publishers if you stole my work which they own copyright to.
> Wake up training community its time to evolve! Share your stuff and watch
> as it grows into something you never knew it could. Thanks again for the
> many contributors (and future contributors) of your coaching
> materials…watch your thoughts evolve!
Wake up training community and realize that when you create something it belongs to you, and you have the right to control its use. You can give it away as you please, but please don’t deny those of us who wish to control our work the right to do that.
>
> PS - Just a thought: This protectionism/scarcity thinking is exactly what
> destroyed TRDEV-L.
Naaa. But that’s a whole long story no one wants to rehash, except to say that David really wanted to let it go for a long time, I think. The events leading up to the theft of the work was the last straw.
And sadly its typical that you would blame the demise on protectionism. I would say that the notion that stealing intellectual property and the outcomes when that’s done destroyed the list. Let’s put the responsibility on the thieves, not the people who want to enforce their moral and legal rights.