Thread by @CopyrightLibn, I haven't written about this publicly because it is happening with a [...]

I haven't written about this publicly because it is happening with a scholarly organization that is not one I usually participate in. However, I've now seen regular members discussing, -and- I just learned something new about the org response today, so, here we go:

I sent a proposal in to the @caavisual 2021 conference at the request of a much-respected friend who works more regularly in those disciplines. (I do have plenty professional overlap with visual resources/art history work; have presented with VRA & ARLIS many times.)

I did not -like- the information about participation requirements when I applied - if accepted, you have to join the organization right away, and then separately register and pay for the conference.
But I was willing to go along for my friend, & new professional connections!

Then, I was accepted! Hooray! Excited to have some conversations with other presenters. ( https://caa.confex.com/caa/2021/meetingapp.cgi/Paper/11945)

However, -after- acceptance, I was notified of new requirements for submission (including a surprising deadline for content submission), and, more importantly, a new set of content licensing terms.
I emailed explaining that I had issues with the terms on offer on October 30.

Received a reply on November 2 that was responsive, but dodged my concerns.
I replied November 16, and asking what CAA would be doing to help us come to an agreement. I have not heard back from CAA since.

So today I emailed to see where they are with this question, and cc'ed the session organizers, so they will not be surprised if things don't work out.
One of the session organizers shared a new FAQ that CAA has created about the new license!

I did not receive this in response to my specific questions about the license, but it may have been shared with me in a general presenter email. In any case, it is not responsive to my questions. It's not particularly responsive to a -lot- of questions.
https://www.collegeart.org/programs/conference/conference2021/FAQ#permissions

For example,
https://twitter.com/Sonja_Drimmer/status/1340399857954131968
(These are not exactly the specific issues I have with the license, but they're legitimate.)

https://twitter.com/Sonja_Drimmer/status/1340399857954131968

A contract with terms that cannot be negotiated is known in legal jargon as an "adhesive" contract. Yes, that's a pejorative, though lawyers also deploy them strategically a -lot-.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/adhesion_contract_%28contract_of_adhesion%29

I'm not normally a CAA member, so I have little skin in this game, but I do not think that scholarly societies should be deploying adhesive contracts with this degree of complexity against their members.

-Especially- AFTER papers/talks have been accepted at a pretty central conference. Many of the people who have been accepted very much need this presentation for their CVs, etc, so they have little ability to walk away.

I am still hopeful that @caavisual may reconsider, but I'm also making some contingency plans so as to not leave session leaders or fellow panelists in the lurch.

READ THE CONTRACT-Y THINGS YOUR SOCIETIES PRESENT TO YOU; societies should be abt members, but interests diverge...

Latest Threads Unrolled: