[Global_chapter_committee] [Global_conference_committee] [Committees-chairs] [owasp-board] Re: 2012 Speaker Agreement Update

Mark Bristow mark.bristow at owasp.org
Mon Jun 25 12:15:26 UTC 2012


Tom.

>From a GCC perspective this was addressed using the new presentation
template (which is required for use under current agreement)

On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 7:52 AM, Tom Brennan <tomb at owasp.org> wrote:

> Did this thread result in a updated speaker agreement or just a discussion
> about it?
>
> Conferences / Chapters committee owns this - please advise of your
> understanding and URL to current agreement
>
>
>
>
>  On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 7:08 PM, Jim Manico <jim.manico at owasp.org> wrote:
>
>>  Personally, I think we need to enforce, strictly, only 2 points on
>> speakers:
>>
>> 1) All presentations must be creative commons.
>> 2) No vendor pitches.
>>
>> Number 1 is easy to enforce. Number 2 is very difficult to enforce.
>>
>> WhiteHat Security is very kindly sponsoring me to fly all over the
>> country/world to give vendor-neutral secure-coding creative-commons talks.
>> They asked me, very politely, to brand my PowerPoints as WhiteHat Security. At
>> first, I was really against this. But a few things changed my mind today.
>>
>> 1) WhiteHat is paying my salary, which helps support my ability to
>> deliver these talks
>> 2) I would not be able to do this if it was  not for their support giving
>> me massive chunks of time to do this
>> 3) WhiteHat is also a OWASP corporate sponsor and supports various OWASP
>> conferences
>> 4) They are not trying to control ANY of my content; they are even
>> helping me clean up my creative-commons slide decks.
>>
>> My integrity matters to me. But I am starting to think that a company who
>> supports me giving a whole lot of vendor-neutral creative-commons secure
>> coding talks deserves some recognition.
>>
>> Thoughts, community? Am I off base here?
>>
>> --
>> Jim Manico
>> (808) 652-3805
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mar 29, 2012, at 12:40 AM, Thomas Brennan <tomb at owasp.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>> We want to make a agreement that is acceptable to the goals and mission
>> of the association in raising application security.
>>
>> We don't want to have a paper-tiger agreement that is disregarded as to
>> complex and not enforced do we?
>>
>> Revise and alert the speakers for AppSecDC AppSecUSA EMEA, LATAM etc
>> etc.. If OWASP can't do this with our employees and volunteers then call it
>> what Seba noted best practice.
>>
>> Content is content it's either valuable or it's not, I personally don't
>> care about a logo -- in many cases they paid the airfare, lodging and
>> salary of the speaker (this includes Government and other submitters) hence
>> if the preso sucks... It still sucks.
>>
>> The agreement is what I am changeling and asking the committees chapters
>> and conferences trot a health check - and the rest of the leaders for there
>> input as its their organization and they speak for the 160 chapters and
>> running conferences.
>>
>>
>> On Mar 28, 2012, at 6:22 PM, Jim Manico <jim.manico at owasp.org> wrote:
>>
>>  The speaker agreement is already very clear on the topic of
>> presentation branding.
>>
>> " Speakers are encouraged to include their contact information when
>> introducing themselves, but may NOT include their logo on any visual and
>> handout materials. Speakers are to avoid any appearance of commercialism in
>> their session and presentations are to be of a technical or solutions
>> emphasis."
>>
>> At least 50% of all speakers I have seen violate this, including board
>> members.
>>
>> The question is, do we want to enforce this policy (from Nov 2011)?
>>
>> - Jim
>>
>>
>>  A general remark from my side: only use the speaker agreement when in
>> doubt.
>> We use this agreement very pragmatically in Belgium and have only pointed
>> to it upfront to speakers when we thought a certain speaker/topic could
>> become a commercial talk.
>>
>> Otherwise: minimize the red tape :-)
>>
>> --seba
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 8:22 PM, Teresa Stevens <
>> teresa-ann-stevens at comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>>   I agree with Josh. Thanks,
>>>
>>>  Teresa Stevens, CISSP, MSIA, PMMC
>>> Information Security Specialist – Team Leader
>>> San Francisco Bay Area
>>> 510-842-8868 (home), 510-872-2187 (cell)
>>>
>>>
>>>  From: Josh Sokol <josh.sokol at owasp.org>
>>> Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2012 11:13:22 -0500
>>> To: Mark Bristow <mark.bristow at owasp.org>
>>> Cc: "owasp-board at owasp.org" <owasp-board at owasp.org>, "
>>> committees-chairs at lists.owasp.org" <committees-chairs at lists.owasp.org>,
>>> global_conference_committee <global_conference_committee at lists.owasp.org>,
>>> global_chapter_committee Committee <
>>> global_chapter_committee at lists.owasp.org>, Eoin <eoin.keary at owasp.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [Global_chapter_committee] [Global_conference_committee]
>>> [owasp-board] Re: [Committees-chairs] 2012 Speaker Agreement Update
>>>
>>> I agree with what Jason said.  I see no reason why a person should not
>>> be able to include a company logo in a slide deck regardless of whether
>>> they are a corporate member or not.  My $0.02:
>>>
>>> * If the event has a presentation template, then corporate logos should
>>> be limited to only the "About Me" page of the presentation.
>>>
>>> ~josh
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 9:20 AM, Mark Bristow <mark.bristow at owasp.org>wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think these are reasonable changes except the no-logo on the "about
>>>> me" slide.  I think that's fine if we put a boundry on the size.  The GCC
>>>> is in the final process of selecting a new presentation template, so this
>>>> will be easy to add.
>>>>
>>>>  On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 12:29 PM, Eoin <eoin.keary at owasp.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>   I am happy with vendor logo as long as content isn't a vendor pitch
>>>>> or vendor bespoke (ip) and covers off an issue which is in the open  body
>>>>> of knowledge.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Eoin Keary
>>>>> BCC Risk Advisory
>>>>> Owasp Global Board
>>>>> +353 87 977 2988
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 27 Mar 2012, at 16:13, Jason Li <jason.li at owasp.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>  Agreed on the use of the template.
>>>>>
>>>>> What's the purpose of the restriction on the company logo?
>>>>>
>>>>> Is it an attempt to spur corporate membership? Is it meant to remove
>>>>> the "vendor"-ness of a talk?
>>>>>
>>>>> If the former, I think it actually comes across as off-putting and
>>>>> might have the opposite effect... If the latter, then the inclusion of the
>>>>> company logo if and only if they are an OWASP supporter seems overly
>>>>> restrictive IMHO in comparison to the goal.
>>>>>
>>>>> What about updating the template to include a specific place and
>>>>> limited small size for a logo and mandating the use of the template? That
>>>>> would limit how much a presenter could plaster their logo across a
>>>>> presentation.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Jason
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 9:35 AM, Tom Brennan <tomb at owasp.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Committee(s);
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Today OWASP utilizes a Speaker Agreement that outlines the rules for
>>>>>> compensation of speakers, required templates, audio/visual, vulnerabilities
>>>>>> disclosure and a laundry list of other terms.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The Document:  https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Speaker_Agreement
>>>>>>
>>>>>> With the upcoming long list of AppSec<Regional>, AppSec<Global> and
>>>>>> chapter events  globally happening weekly enforcement of this policy or
>>>>>> event policing of this policy is difficult however the spirit of the
>>>>>> speaker agreement in keeping OWASP pure to technical,
>>>>>
>>>>>    _______________________________________________
>>
>> Committees-chairs mailing list
>> Committees-chairs at lists.owasp.org
>> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/committees-chairs
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Global_conference_committee mailing list
> Global_conference_committee at lists.owasp.org
> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/global_conference_committee
>
>


-- 
Mark Bristow
(703) 596-5175
mark.bristow at owasp.org

OWASP Global Conferences Committee Chair - http://is.gd/5MTvF
OWASP DC Chapter Co-Chair - http://is.gd/5MTwu
AppSec DC Organizer - https://www.appsecdc.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/global_chapter_committee/attachments/20120625/6439fbae/attachment.html>


More information about the Global_chapter_committee mailing list