The reason, set out by the chairman, for the decision to restrict use of the forum to members was :
“….primarily made with the purpose of protecting the Club’s intellectual property and goodwill”.
Perhaps if the chairman were to spell out the nature and extent of the intellectual property that the club owns, seeks to protect and is under threat by free access to this forum a more informed debate would ensue. The information currently available and that lack of any posts setting out the case in favour of a restriction leads most to conclude that the decision is primarily about protectionism and the reasons behind this desire have not been adequately explored and articulated. More information is needed.
Specifically chairman:
1.does the club hold copyright, patents, design rights or any other such property that it needs to protect ?
2.What effect or threat does the current rules for forum use have on any such rights?
If the committee came to an informed view on the subject there is a need to explain the issues.
The chairman’s post included “….the Club cannot continue to permit a substantial part of its output to be provided free-of-charge…”. This hints at the need to protect the YOWL. The primary function of the club, in terms of assets deployed , is magazine publishing. The rising costs of printing and distributing printed material must be a matter for great concern to the committee.
In my view there needs to be a debate on the wider issues of the threats facing the club and only then should prescriptive decisions be taken.
To the best of my knowledge protectionism has never worked in any instance.
rjv
