I think Bob Zelin had an answer for this. --J.B.
johnrobmoore wrote:
> But to take a tool away and provide no way of accomplishing the task doesn't work. In an ideal world it should be the operator says, "I need this tool to do this job" and IT's job to make it happen. If IT feels there is a legal reason to not use a piece of software they should at least provide an alternative solution while working to accommodate the operators preference. Perhaps it's time to "Occupy IT" Set up a few tents in their office and camp out for a while. ;-)
>
> --- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, Jeff Cook<jeff@...> wrote:
>
>> I don't think you want IT specifying your tools. Even to make a point. Scary.
>>
>> --
>> Jeff Cook
>> jeff@...
>> 703-980-1104 (cell)
>> CookStudios.com
>>
>>
>>
>> On Nov 7, 2011, at 1:03 PM, Shawn Broes<shawn.broes@...> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Amen.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 9:55 AM, johnrobmoore<bigfish@...> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> **
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Has your IT manager provided you with a "legal" alternative to fill your
>>>> needs? I would think it is his/her job to provide what you need to do your
>>>> job properly and efficiently. Why doesn't he/she do the necessary research?
>>>> It's frustrating when people focus only on the problem and not the solution
>>>> it just makes it harder for everyone.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, Steve Pankow<spankow@> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I've had no luck contacting the author of MPEG Streamclip regarding MPEG
>>>>> licensing, and our IT manager continues to beat me over the head
>>>>>
>>>> regarding
>>>>
>>>>> this. A snip from the latest round:
>>>>>
>>>>> "I know you want to be able to keep using this software, but the license
>>>>> agreement specifically notes Broadcast TV as having to pay a license,
>>>>>
>>>> which
>>>>
>>>>> we are not. If you can locate a legal approval for use, I would love to
>>>>>
>>>> see
>>>>
>>>>> it...Given that the mail list you asked about thinks it is legal to use,
>>>>>
>>>> is
>>>>
>>>>> not legal approval. You have a copy of the license, it says Broadcast TV
>>>>> needs to pay a license fee. We have not to my knowledge, thus you should
>>>>> stop using it."
>>>>>
>>>>> For the curious, here's the legal issue in question from the MPEG LA
>>>>> License for MPEG-4 Video FAQ:
>>>>>
>>>>> "Where MPEG-4 Visual material is provided for remuneration, video
>>>>>
>>>> providers
>>>>
>>>>> may be required to pay royalties for the right to use the decoders and
>>>>> encoders in the following circumstances:
>>>>>
>>>>> -MPEG-4 Visual material is provided for direct remuneration (for example,
>>>>> remuneration is from a user for a subscription and the number of
>>>>>
>>>> different
>>>>
>>>>> subscribers exceeds certain minimums, or for specific video titles).
>>>>>
>>>>> -Remuneration is from other sources (for example, free over-the-air
>>>>> broadcasting)."
>>>>>
>>>>> I know people here in the group tend to think having a valid copy of
>>>>> Quicktime Pro with the MPEG option will cover end-users, but I now need
>>>>>
>>>> to
>>>>
>>>>> find official documentation from somewhere stating this is in fact true.
>>>>> Anyone have any ideas?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Steve Pankow
>>>>> Creative Services Editor
>>>>> KEZI-9
>>>>> Eugene, Oregon
>>>>> stevepankow@
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Search the official Complete Avid-L archives at: http://archives.bengrosser.com/avid/
>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Search the official Complete Avid-L archives at: http://archives.bengrosser.com/avid/
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
No comments:
Post a Comment