STC preferential treatment for members?

[geoff-h -at- MTL -dot- FERIC -dot- CA]

 Bill Sullivan wondered <<how come things like STC
 Conference Proceedings are so expensive?>>

 Because they're expensive to produce, even given that
 they're assembled by unpaid volunteers, and because the
 profits (if any) go to the chapter or STC to subsidize
 future conferences, the journal, research grants, office
 expenses, etc. I don't recall there being a vast
 differential in price for nonmembers, but isn't it
 legitimate to provide equal benefits to nonmembers but
 at a higher cost than for members, who have paid the
 price of admission?

 <<And why do I get the impression that  Intercom articles,
 Journal of TC articles, and chapter newsletter articles
 cannot be copied or otherwise passed around?>>

 Because you understand copyright law? <gdrlh> Seriously,
 though, the same rules apply to any publication: you can't
 photocopy and distribute it in whole or in part without
 permission. (The only good exception under the new laws is
 a single copy for _personal_ use; that way, I don't have to
 eviscerate my copy of PC Magazine (for instance) to cut out
 articles I want to keep on file, nor do I have to rent a
 library to keep the back issues after I've already paid for
 the original issue. Everybody makes illegal copies anyway,
 but that doesn't make it right.

 <<Why can't the STC put these things up on the Internet
 where people who are interested can download them and
 benefit from them?>>

 In fact, they _do_ do this for much of their material.
 Check out www.stc-va.org and you can probably find the main
 journals at any really good library (e.g., at universities
 that offer tech. comm. programs). Moreover, you can always
 get reprints or file copies from the original authors; I've
 never met an author who wasn't delighted to send a free
 copy of his latest publication.

 <<And the STC SIGs and their newsletters and email
 discussion groups? Can they be legitimately made
 exclusive?>>

 I can't speak for U.S. law (I'm a Canuck), but if it works
 for the National Geographic Society, why wouldn't it work
 for STC? If you want to receive the benefit, you should pay
 something for it: there ain't no free lunch.

 <<Is Bruce Byfield right when he says: In fact, from my
 experience, it appears that the STC at all levels is more
 interested in preserving its own well-being than in helping
 its members.>>

 Well, since it's hard to help your members if you aren't
 still in business, there's a certain element of
 practicality to this approach, don't you think? There are
 unquestionable politicians in STC, and they may even
 outnumber the "missionaries", and that's always a problem,
 but I think the real issue here is one of perception: STC
 is a professional society, not a formal lobby group, not a
 licensing organisation, and not a union, and thus has an
 entirely different mandate. Whether you agree with that
 mandate is another issue.

 --Geoff Hart     @8^{)}     geoff-h -at- mtl -dot- feric -dot- ca
 Disclaimer: Speaking for myself, not FERIC.