NAQT licensing policy and packet-trading amnesty

Dormant threads from the high school sections are preserved here.
Locked
User avatar
Important Bird Area
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 6113
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2003 3:33 pm
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Contact:

NAQT licensing policy and packet-trading amnesty

Post by Important Bird Area »

naqt.com wrote:Over the winter holidays, NAQT investigated a number of unauthorized distributions of its packet sets; for the most part, these took the form of packet set trades (including some sets from the current competition year).

While looking into those trades, NAQT was surprised to find that misinformation about its distribution and licensing policies was widespread; given the critical importance of question security to tournaments and of intellectual property rights in general to question-producers, we are taking steps to correct those misunderstandings.

First, we have documented (and clarified) our policy on how materials licensed from NAQT may be distributed in a single place. There are nuances, but the gist of the policy is that questions are licensed to a program and may be shared freely within that program. Questions may not be distributed outside of the program with one exception: A tournament host may give a printed copy of the questions to each school that attends.

Second, in the spirit of treating the New Year as a time to begin afresh, we are instituting an amnesty period for the unauthorized distribution of NAQT packet sets that took place prior to January 26, 2015. Our overarching goal is to make a clean start on the issue: People won't fear punishments for past transgressions, and everybody involved should have a better understanding of NAQT's policies and actions.

In practice, the program will work as follows:

Anybody who has distributed or received packets (or other materials from NAQT, including our frequency lists) in violation of the above policy can contact us at [email protected] to tell us:

What packets they distributed or received

Who the other party in the transaction was

When they were sent (approximately)

How they were transmitted (e-mail? physical copy?)

In addition, that person needs to:
Commit to deleting any electronic copies of those packets

Commit to destroying any printed copies of those packets

(Alternatively, copies may be retained in accordance with our licensing policy if the purchase price is paid to NAQT.)

In exchange, NAQT will agree to take no punitive action for the infringement (ever). In particular, there will be no fines, no bans, no suspensions of writer accounts, no blacklisting from our championships, and so on. This promise even extends to include the distribution of "live" packet sets (those still being used for tournaments).

Note that the "no punitive action" clause only applies to people who self-report their violations to NAQT. It does not apply to the second parties in those transactions (unless they also self-report the same transaction). It also does not apply to all distributions prior to January 26, only those that are reported to NAQT before the end of the amnesty period.

The amnesty period will run for two weeks, starting on Monday, January 26. People may take advantage of it through the end of Monday, February 9.
Full details

NAQT licensing policy
Jeff Hoppes
President, Northern California Quiz Bowl Alliance
former HSQB Chief Admin (2012-13)
VP for Communication and history subject editor, NAQT
Editor emeritus, ACF

"I wish to make some kind of joke about Jeff's love of birds, but I always fear he'll turn them on me Hitchcock-style." -Fred
User avatar
Important Bird Area
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 6113
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2003 3:33 pm
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Contact:

Re: NAQT licensing policy and packet-trading amnesty

Post by Important Bird Area »

bird bird bird bird bird wrote:
naqt.com wrote:The amnesty period will run for two weeks, starting on Monday, January 26. People may take advantage of it through the end of Monday, February 9.
Full details

NAQT licensing policy
Please note that February 9th is tomorrow.
Jeff Hoppes
President, Northern California Quiz Bowl Alliance
former HSQB Chief Admin (2012-13)
VP for Communication and history subject editor, NAQT
Editor emeritus, ACF

"I wish to make some kind of joke about Jeff's love of birds, but I always fear he'll turn them on me Hitchcock-style." -Fred
User avatar
Important Bird Area
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 6113
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2003 3:33 pm
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Contact:

Re: NAQT licensing policy and packet-trading amnesty

Post by Important Bird Area »

February 9th is today.

We have received a significant quantity of packet-trading reports. If you have participated in unlicensed packet exchanges, including the so-called "underground packet railroad," it is very much in your best interest to report to [email protected] this evening.
Jeff Hoppes
President, Northern California Quiz Bowl Alliance
former HSQB Chief Admin (2012-13)
VP for Communication and history subject editor, NAQT
Editor emeritus, ACF

"I wish to make some kind of joke about Jeff's love of birds, but I always fear he'll turn them on me Hitchcock-style." -Fred
User avatar
Cheynem
Sin
Posts: 7220
Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Grand Rapids, Michigan

Re: NAQT licensing policy and packet-trading amnesty

Post by Cheynem »

For the record, I find this "name names" business to be vaguely unsettling at best. Obviously NAQT is a company and they wish to make profits and I dig that, but let's face it, the biggest problems with packet trading are:

1. Someone trying to make illegal profits (i.e. selling old sets)
2. Someone trying to distribute live sets to people who may end up playing it
3. Someone running a sort of packet mill that negates any possibility of making profits (i.e., setting up an online database)

In those cases, those are extremely problematic and should be shut down. However, I would venture a lot of the NAQT self notifications involve:

1. An individual curious about a set he was never going to play (i.e., college student is interested in looking at HSNCT, especially if some of his questions ended up in it)
2. An individual interested in revisiting questions from a tournament he played or moderated at (I wanted to look back at a SCT and ICT I played; I'm told you as a player have no rights to this, only your team)
3. People wishing to have fun by playing incredibly out of date sets (1997 ICT)

In these instances, I find it somewhat unrealistic to expect that in any of these cases NAQT is losing profits (obviously if a chain reaction ensues from this, like the individuals in 1-3 then turn around and hand them off to teams to practice on, that's bad). I mean, I'm also not expecting a massive legal campaign against the people reported doing this, but at the very least, I think there's some goodwill loss and annoyance gained by NAQT in this regard. In other words, I think this campaign should attempt to distinguish more on the uses of such packets and avoid the obvious negative implications of asking the people "turning themselves in" to "name names" when doing so.

Edit: At the very least, NAQT should consider (if they aren't already doing so?) e-mailing people who have been "named" by other people and telling them they should confess, suitably repent, and destroy illegal copies.
Mike Cheyne
Formerly U of Minnesota

"You killed HSAPQ"--Matt Bollinger
Rothlover
Yuna
Posts: 815
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 8:41 pm

Re: NAQT licensing policy and packet-trading amnesty

Post by Rothlover »

Cheynem wrote:For the record, I find this "name names" business to be vaguely unsettling at best. Obviously NAQT is a company and they wish to make profits and I dig that, but let's face it, the biggest problems with packet trading are:

1. Someone trying to make illegal profits (i.e. selling old sets)
2. Someone trying to distribute live sets to people who may end up playing it
3. Someone running a sort of packet mill that negates any possibility of making profits (i.e., setting up an online database)

In those cases, those are extremely problematic and should be shut down. However, I would venture a lot of the NAQT self notifications involve:

1. An individual curious about a set he was never going to play (i.e., college student is interested in looking at HSNCT, especially if some of his questions ended up in it)
2. An individual interested in revisiting questions from a tournament he played or moderated at (I wanted to look back at a SCT and ICT I played; I'm told you as a player have no rights to this, only your team)
3. People wishing to have fun by playing incredibly out of date sets (1997 ICT)

In these instances, I find it somewhat unrealistic to expect that in any of these cases NAQT is losing profits (obviously if a chain reaction ensues from this, like the individuals in 1-3 then turn around and hand them off to teams to practice on, that's bad). I mean, I'm also not expecting a massive legal campaign against the people reported doing this, but at the very least, I think there's some goodwill loss and annoyance gained by NAQT in this regard. In other words, I think this campaign should attempt to distinguish more on the uses of such packets and avoid the obvious negative implications of asking the people "turning themselves in" to "name names" when doing so.

Edit: At the very least, NAQT should consider (if they aren't already doing so?) e-mailing people who have been "named" by other people and telling them they should confess, suitably repent, and destroy illegal copies.
1000% agree with Mike on this. In lieu of contacting this e-mail address, I'd gladly note that I likely have a bunch of naqt sets on my various hard drives etc from 2004-present, all likely from sets I played/staffed (or at least gave q feedback in discussion.) Almost all of those sets would have gone unviewed by me in at least 7+ years. I have neither the time nor desire to weed through all said hard drives and search through my gmail, where a cursory search for "NAQT" yields over 2000 results, simply because some new push to enforce NAQT's IP has been enacted. I appreciate the spirit of the new rules, but if NAQT is making no distinction/allowance for the circumstances of why one might have a set, when they might have gotten it and the trouble it is to figure out all the information needed to satisfy this amnesty request, then it is simply absurd.

And yes, requiring the "naming of names," especially in the previously mentioned mid-aughts collegiate example is just plain troubling (and I assume it includes this since the underground packet railroad was specifically named, and that's not really a thing that substantively exists anymore, and hasn't really been a significant "thing" since like 2007-08, when qb archives and databases started getting good.)
Dan Passner Brandeis '06 JTS/Columbia '11-'12 Ben Gurion University of the Negev/Columbia '12?
User avatar
TheDoctor
Rikku
Posts: 407
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 12:34 pm

Re: NAQT licensing policy and packet-trading amnesty

Post by TheDoctor »

I absolutely agree with this, especially since I have my doubts as to whether this will even manage to accomplish what it sets out to do. I could easily see this move, as presented, fostering insular social groups united in a refusal to report each other, rather than the friendly, open dialogue NAQT purports to be seeking. I've reported as much as I can remember, since my team wants to play our conference tournament next week, but I've since been living in fear of discovering an old set gifted me by a friend that I simply forgot to delete. Did someone who I forgot report me for something that I forgot? Will my team be punished for it? The very fact that I have to worry about this puts me off NAQT sets even more than the prohibitive prices do.
Kristin Strey
SCOP
Head Coach, Winnebago High School (2014-)
Head Coach, Thurgood Marshall School (Rockford) (2022-)
Assistant Coach, IMSA (2010-2012)
Northern Illinois University Quiz Bowl Association founder
User avatar
Important Bird Area
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 6113
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2003 3:33 pm
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Contact:

Re: NAQT licensing policy and packet-trading amnesty

Post by Important Bird Area »

Cheynem wrote:NAQT should consider (if they aren't already doing so?) e-mailing people who have been "named" by other people and telling them they should confess, suitably repent, and destroy illegal copies.
We will be sending out such emails to all named parties later this week.

In general, we hope that this process ends with a clean slate for everyone. We do not expect (or want) to hand out any significant punishments, unless we find evidence of deliberate cheating, or someone categorically refuses to accept the terms of our amnesty.
Jeff Hoppes
President, Northern California Quiz Bowl Alliance
former HSQB Chief Admin (2012-13)
VP for Communication and history subject editor, NAQT
Editor emeritus, ACF

"I wish to make some kind of joke about Jeff's love of birds, but I always fear he'll turn them on me Hitchcock-style." -Fred
User avatar
Tees-Exe Line
Tidus
Posts: 623
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 5:02 pm

Re: NAQT licensing policy and packet-trading amnesty

Post by Tees-Exe Line »

I scoured my inbox for circulated NAQT packets and hereby denounce the below-named individual.

UPDATE: Ha. Guess some denunciations aren't welcome?
Marshall I. Steinbaum

Oxford University (2002-2005)
University of Chicago (2008-2014)
University of Utah (2019- )

Get in the elevator.
User avatar
Important Bird Area
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 6113
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2003 3:33 pm
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Contact:

Re: NAQT licensing policy and packet-trading amnesty

Post by Important Bird Area »

"Why is NAQT asking people to name names?"

1. So that we can make sure everyone involved in packet-trading has an opportunity to take advantage of our amnesty plan. We're not trying to assemble a ban list or to create division within the quizbowl community- we're going to email these people to point them to our licensing policy and the amnesty offer (which they will be given a reasonable amount of time to take advantage of).

2. We're doing this so we can get personal assurances that packets are being deleted and that people who have been trading are directly informed about our policy.

3. It's possible we might find evidence of activities not covered under the amnesty program:
naqt.com wrote:If we discover that a player had prior access to a question set before competing on it, we will retroactively forfeit his or her team's games.

If we discover a consistent pattern of acquiring packet sets prior to playing on them (i.e., cheating), we reserve the right to impose punishments.

If we discover that people have been reselling our work, we reserve the right to impose punishments and/or seek legal remedies. That is, this amnesty only covers noncommercial distribution. (The amnesty does cover receiving sets as part of a commercial transaction, just not distributing them.)

If we discover that people have been plagiarizing our questions to create their own packets or to otherwise attribute their origin to another party, we reserve the right to impose punishments and/or seek legal remedies.


We hope the community agrees with us that such actions are unacceptable and violate the norms of fair competition that we all rely upon.

"Why is there a deadline?"

We don't want this process to drag on indefinitely, or to disrupt the travel plans of teams attending our national championships. NAQT wants to wrap up the entire process as soon as possible so we can all move forward with tournament plans for the spring. If your name has been reported to us, we will be in touch with you this week.

Please don't "live in fear" of punishment from NAQT. It was not our intent for this announcement to cause distress; in fact, we hoped to provide peace of mind by offering this opportunity for amnesty. We understand that records and memories from past years are fallible, and we have no intention of punishing people who cooperate with us but missed a small number of minor incidents.
Jeff Hoppes
President, Northern California Quiz Bowl Alliance
former HSQB Chief Admin (2012-13)
VP for Communication and history subject editor, NAQT
Editor emeritus, ACF

"I wish to make some kind of joke about Jeff's love of birds, but I always fear he'll turn them on me Hitchcock-style." -Fred
User avatar
Mewto55555
Tidus
Posts: 709
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2010 9:27 pm

Re: NAQT licensing policy and packet-trading amnesty

Post by Mewto55555 »

I'd like to express my extreme displeasure at a thus far unmentioned portion of the new state of things, where one is expected to destroy all personal copies of sets they themselves are no longer "licensed" to have once they are no longer at a given school (for example, I am apparently required to delete all my copies of IS-sets and HSNCTs I scanned while at Ladue, and will have to delete any SCTs/ICTs once I graduate from Chicago).

For a majority of the tournaments I played in high school, members of our team contributed a non-trivial portion of the entry fees out of their own pockets. It's not an exaggeration to say I spent hundreds of dollars on NAQT tournaments over the course of high school, part of the benefits of which was access to a large trove of NAQT packets I could study from. I know many people on less well-funded college teams similarly pay out of pocket to attend SCT/ICT, and are likely to be equally infuriated when they're forced to flush part of their investment down the drain after graduation.

If NAQT is insistent on a provision of this sort being in place, then may I suggest the far more reasonable concept of being "individually licensed" to have copies of a set, which is attained by playing a tournament on that set (or being a member of a club that played it during the year it was played)?
Max
formerly of Ladue, Chicago
User avatar
Important Bird Area
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 6113
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2003 3:33 pm
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Contact:

Re: NAQT licensing policy and packet-trading amnesty

Post by Important Bird Area »

To be clear, "players are supposed to delete sets that are licensed to their clubs when they leave school" is not "the new state of things"—this has been NAQT's licensing policy all along, but evidently almost no one understood this. (If a player paid out of pocket for a set, they can claim the license for the set, but then there is no club license covering anyone else from the same club.) Now that we've clarified the policy, we are asking people to bring themselves into compliance.

We plan to revisit our licensing policy this summer, and will consider future proposals about individual licenses at that time.
the license agreement at the top of every NAQT packet wrote:NAQT licenses these questions to your program only on the condition that you fully pay for these questions and accept all terms of our license agreement. Possession of these questions constitutes acceptance of the license. ... These questions may be used only for on-campus events by your program, such as intramural tournaments, exhibition matches, practices, and try-outs.

[Emphasis added --JTH]
Jeff Hoppes
President, Northern California Quiz Bowl Alliance
former HSQB Chief Admin (2012-13)
VP for Communication and history subject editor, NAQT
Editor emeritus, ACF

"I wish to make some kind of joke about Jeff's love of birds, but I always fear he'll turn them on me Hitchcock-style." -Fred
Locked