27th October 2009, 12:19 AM
sorry
the point orbits around the concept of time and money in relation to you pay for what you get.
say an employer wins a contract and yet finds that the contract has been under estimated, then the work carried out is of a relative standard, but a standard none the less (as long as the site remains integratl and intact.
also the notion realtes to what kind of work is conducted where
say an employer whom wishes to turn archaeology into a mass production factory line then the intellectual property rights may perdominantly remain within the relm of post ex whereas if the employer moves towARDS THE CONCEPT OF digger inclusion into the writing up process and the primary record is ellivated then the intellectual property rights would be in the hands of the diggers.
Intellectual property rights has been a grey area in academia for a long time where it is beleived if you write something at university then the university retains the copyright.
this is not so, they may hold distribution rights but not the intellectual property itself as the students are in fact paying to supply the material as opposed to being paid to accumulate the material.
Your right though in that there is not really alot of movement in this.
but there is if you include the notion of personal development plans, whereby an employer invests in staff devlopment, or it does not.
if the ifa places a premium upon those with a broader knowledge base then it pays to be invested in rather than providing meat for the post ex grinder.
it may come to be that people will be placed in the situation whereby they are employed on the basis of funding something they do not have any or have a chance of any involvement in.
thus intellectual property rights become a premium edge on the form of employee rights you hold.
if you have time then you can go to town and develkop personal skills and limits, but on a cut throat budget, realistically there is nothing but stripped down data retreival.
:face-huh:
does that help
the point orbits around the concept of time and money in relation to you pay for what you get.
say an employer wins a contract and yet finds that the contract has been under estimated, then the work carried out is of a relative standard, but a standard none the less (as long as the site remains integratl and intact.
also the notion realtes to what kind of work is conducted where
say an employer whom wishes to turn archaeology into a mass production factory line then the intellectual property rights may perdominantly remain within the relm of post ex whereas if the employer moves towARDS THE CONCEPT OF digger inclusion into the writing up process and the primary record is ellivated then the intellectual property rights would be in the hands of the diggers.
Intellectual property rights has been a grey area in academia for a long time where it is beleived if you write something at university then the university retains the copyright.
this is not so, they may hold distribution rights but not the intellectual property itself as the students are in fact paying to supply the material as opposed to being paid to accumulate the material.
Your right though in that there is not really alot of movement in this.
but there is if you include the notion of personal development plans, whereby an employer invests in staff devlopment, or it does not.
if the ifa places a premium upon those with a broader knowledge base then it pays to be invested in rather than providing meat for the post ex grinder.
it may come to be that people will be placed in the situation whereby they are employed on the basis of funding something they do not have any or have a chance of any involvement in.
thus intellectual property rights become a premium edge on the form of employee rights you hold.
if you have time then you can go to town and develkop personal skills and limits, but on a cut throat budget, realistically there is nothing but stripped down data retreival.
:face-huh:
does that help
txt is
Mike
Mike