|Home||Switchboard||Unix Administration||Red Hat||TCP/IP Networks||Neoliberalism||Toxic Managers|
May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)
Bigger doesn't imply better. Bigger often is a sign of obesity, of lost control, of overcomplexity, of cancerous cells
People need to get out more. See beyond your own little niche.
There is a concept that fascinates me: cognitive capture. In my crude layman's terms this means that the environment you live and work in all day becomes your frame of reference for all reality. Like happens with ITSM and ITIL. Those who want to constrain use of ITIL need to get out more.
I joked about it long ago with "a Swiss bank account".
E.g. Vendors who only get to talk with Fortune 500 clients think everybody has bottomless resources and that a CMDB benefits everyone. Consultants who only talk to clients rich enough to talk to consultants get an equally distorted view of the world. People who only talk to broken sites think most sites are broken. Service desk analysts who talk to idiots all day start to think all users are idiots. IT techs think everybody can understand IT. Geeks think everybody loves to play with it.
Me, I'm sure I'm as biased by my own environment, although I am aware of the effect and I work hard not to be, by reading and communicating widely, and hopefully in an open-minded way (Quiet in the back row! I think I'm open-minded. If one is too open-minded your brain falls out - another effect I avoid). The biggest sites in New Zealand have 10,000-15,000 users. It's small. I think the mix of my personal consulting experience here in NZ with the content I consume from overseas helps me get some balance.
A closely related phenomenon is confirmation bias: hearing only that which confirms your own preconceptions.
What brought this blog post on was
this comment from Matthew
...your apparent misunderstanding of 'fair use' of copyright material. 'Fair use' where it exists at all, is basically for the purposes of 'criticism and review'. It is not there to allow "quoting reasonable portions of text" to produce competing products to the original which appears to be what you are asking Axelos for. So it is OK to quote a piece of ITIL to point out its flaws or good points as part of a wider work, but just copying "reasonable portions" to produce something that has the IP of ITIL at its heart isn't ok.
original post explicitly says
it doesn't look good for we consultants... Imagine you are a freelance consultant like me, offering independent advice... I defy you to read this and come away confident you even know what the requirements are for a consultant. Software vendor or book writer? Yes. Consultant? Dunno...
Can you address the following questions for me as it is unclear under exactly what circumstances a licence is required to use ITIL.
1) I assume that normal conditions of copyright fair use apply. Is that correct? In other words, quoting reasonable portions of text is permitted with attribution as it is for any copyright work.
I'd have thought that made it pretty damn clear I'm talking about consultants and not content-writers competing with Axelos. Matthew seems to me to be suffering from cognitive capture: I'm guessing he works in some way related to content-creation more than content-use.
There are two million certified ITIL users. There are hundreds of thousands (millions?) of IT consultants. There are a couple of dozen content-producing firms who might conceivably want to rip off ITIL. For the vast majority of ITIL users, ITIL is a tool they use in passing as part of their day job. It isn't their world. It doesn't consume their waking hours. They don't think much about it and they certainly don't write about it. They just want to get the job done without some officious meddler in the UK getting in the way.
Say I want to consult to a client about how to create an operating model for a new service, and as part of my advice I want to write a report that says "ITIL's guidance on this says .... but in this case I think you need to adapt it so that .... and therefore I recommend ...." That's fair use, Matthew. But as I understand it I need a license from Axelos to say it. It's even possible the document needs several months of approval review - depending on how you interpret the opaque rules.
As I said in a comment on the orginal post, it's like the publishers of books of metallurgical advice trying to say who should be an engineer. The registration of engineers is a local issue for each country, and the selection of engineers is an act of due diligence by their clients. Those clients may well want an engineer to have a certificate of metallurgy if they're building a bridge... or not. It is certainly none of the business of a publishing house in Britain to try to restrict who can and can't use their books.
(BTW Matthew, copyright "fair use" or "fair dealing" is not limited to criticism and review. It's not about the use; it is about the intent. To claim fair use, one has to show that the use contributes to an enrichment of the public, adds value to the original work, and doesn't act to supercede the original product. )
Let's consider content creators too. I may even want to write a book that says "Here's what ITIL says about Change Management... Whereas DevOps thinks that...". I DEFINITELY can't do that without crawling up the backside of the ITIL bureaucracy. Unless I invoke "fair use".
The more that ITIL gets written about and discussed - brilliantly and badly - the more its use will grow. The number of "authors" who will slap a new title on an ITIL book is tiny, and frankly who cares if they do? They'll get called out and shamed in the online community. They won't suddenly displace ITIL. And they can be nailed under copyright law for not attributing their source.
So before you get in a paranoid tizzy about mis-use of ITIL, get out a bit more and understand what real use of ITIL looks like and what 99% of people want to use ITIL for. We're trying to get a job done, and by doing it we will advance ITIL and ITSM.
Groupthink : Two Party System as Polyarchy : Corruption of Regulators : Bureaucracies : Understanding Micromanagers and Control Freaks : Toxic Managers : Harvard Mafia : Diplomatic Communication : Surviving a Bad Performance Review : Insufficient Retirement Funds as Immanent Problem of Neoliberal Regime : PseudoScience : Who Rules America : Neoliberalism : The Iron Law of Oligarchy : Libertarian Philosophy
War and Peace : Skeptical Finance : John Kenneth Galbraith :Talleyrand : Oscar Wilde : Otto Von Bismarck : Keynes : George Carlin : Skeptics : Propaganda : SE quotes : Language Design and Programming Quotes : Random IT-related quotes : Somerset Maugham : Marcus Aurelius : Kurt Vonnegut : Eric Hoffer : Winston Churchill : Napoleon Bonaparte : Ambrose Bierce : Bernard Shaw : Mark Twain Quotes
Vol 25, No.12 (December, 2013) Rational Fools vs. Efficient Crooks The efficient markets hypothesis : Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2013 : Unemployment Bulletin, 2010 : Vol 23, No.10 (October, 2011) An observation about corporate security departments : Slightly Skeptical Euromaydan Chronicles, June 2014 : Greenspan legacy bulletin, 2008 : Vol 25, No.10 (October, 2013) Cryptolocker Trojan (Win32/Crilock.A) : Vol 25, No.08 (August, 2013) Cloud providers as intelligence collection hubs : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 : Inequality Bulletin, 2009 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 : Copyleft Problems Bulletin, 2004 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 : Energy Bulletin, 2010 : Malware Protection Bulletin, 2010 : Vol 26, No.1 (January, 2013) Object-Oriented Cult : Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2011 : Vol 23, No.11 (November, 2011) Softpanorama classification of sysadmin horror stories : Vol 25, No.05 (May, 2013) Corporate bullshit as a communication method : Vol 25, No.06 (June, 2013) A Note on the Relationship of Brooks Law and Conway Law
Fifty glorious years (1950-2000): the triumph of the US computer engineering : Donald Knuth : TAoCP and its Influence of Computer Science : Richard Stallman : Linus Torvalds : Larry Wall : John K. Ousterhout : CTSS : Multix OS Unix History : Unix shell history : VI editor : History of pipes concept : Solaris : MS DOS : Programming Languages History : PL/1 : Simula 67 : C : History of GCC development : Scripting Languages : Perl history : OS History : Mail : DNS : SSH : CPU Instruction Sets : SPARC systems 1987-2006 : Norton Commander : Norton Utilities : Norton Ghost : Frontpage history : Malware Defense History : GNU Screen : OSS early history
The Peter Principle : Parkinson Law : 1984 : The Mythical Man-Month : How to Solve It by George Polya : The Art of Computer Programming : The Elements of Programming Style : The Unix Haterís Handbook : The Jargon file : The True Believer : Programming Pearls : The Good Soldier Svejk : The Power Elite
Most popular humor pages:
Manifest of the Softpanorama IT Slacker Society : Ten Commandments of the IT Slackers Society : Computer Humor Collection : BSD Logo Story : The Cuckoo's Egg : IT Slang : C++ Humor : ARE YOU A BBS ADDICT? : The Perl Purity Test : Object oriented programmers of all nations : Financial Humor : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 : The Most Comprehensive Collection of Editor-related Humor : Programming Language Humor : Goldman Sachs related humor : Greenspan humor : C Humor : Scripting Humor : Real Programmers Humor : Web Humor : GPL-related Humor : OFM Humor : Politically Incorrect Humor : IDS Humor : "Linux Sucks" Humor : Russian Musical Humor : Best Russian Programmer Humor : Microsoft plans to buy Catholic Church : Richard Stallman Related Humor : Admin Humor : Perl-related Humor : Linus Torvalds Related humor : PseudoScience Related Humor : Networking Humor : Shell Humor : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2012 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2013 : Java Humor : Software Engineering Humor : Sun Solaris Related Humor : Education Humor : IBM Humor : Assembler-related Humor : VIM Humor : Computer Viruses Humor : Bright tomorrow is rescheduled to a day after tomorrow : Classic Computer Humor
The Last but not Least Technology is dominated by two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage and those who manage what they do not understand ~Archibald Putt. Ph.D
Copyright © 1996-2018 by Dr. Nikolai Bezroukov. www.softpanorama.org was initially created as a service to the (now defunct) UN Sustainable Development Networking Programme (SDNP) in the author free time and without any remuneration. This document is an industrial compilation designed and created exclusively for educational use and is distributed under the Softpanorama Content License. Original materials copyright belong to respective owners. Quotes are made for educational purposes only in compliance with the fair use doctrine.
FAIR USE NOTICE This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to advance understanding of computer science, IT technology, economic, scientific, and social issues. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided by section 107 of the US Copyright Law according to which such material can be distributed without profit exclusively for research and educational purposes.
This is a Spartan WHYFF (We Help You For Free) site written by people for whom English is not a native language. Grammar and spelling errors should be expected. The site contain some broken links as it develops like a living tree...
|You can use PayPal to make a contribution, supporting development of this site and speed up access. In case softpanorama.org is down you can use the at softpanorama.info|
The statements, views and opinions presented on this web page are those of the author (or referenced source) and are not endorsed by, nor do they necessarily reflect, the opinions of the author present and former employers, SDNP or any other organization the author may be associated with. We do not warrant the correctness of the information provided or its fitness for any purpose.
Last modified: September, 12, 2017