Hi,

my view on it is very simple : if what you have to report is confidential : do not present it during conference.

In theory the answer should be...No. Although many of us may have the best intentions at heart the truth of the matter is, this could lead to some real serious ethical conflicts. Whatever happened to the old fashion ways of taking notes? You mentioned intellectual property which makes things even more complicated since anything that carries this term may lead to infringements of sorts and even litigation if the matter reaches far enough.  I'm sure the information may serve as the seed for new and exiting scientific developments  unrelated to the original material or simply interesting discussions but one must be cautious of that blurry line that divide legitimate interest from straight up plagiarism. I do not wish to exaggerate but sadly many cases of plagiarism have been reported over the years and the method leading to these are those mentioned in your question. Nowadays measures are taken to avoid this type of problem. For example, the American Society for Microbiology hold a conference every year where they strictly prohibit the use or even introduction of recording devices into the exposition venues. They also encourage presenters to bring copies of the material presented for audiences to take with them if interested. I'm sure other organizations do the same.

This is an important question indeed. I attended a seminar in 2009 at Sarawak, Kuching Malaysia, the first Asean symposium on Sago crop. There was a Japanese profesor presenting a patented novelty on biofuel. No photos, recording were aloud at all. When he was asked to let us save his power point presentation, he insisted that the work has a registered IP copyright.

This patent is potentially highly commercial, and in the near future biofuel is going to replace conventional fuel up to 3/4 of world consumption following international agreement in EU, between Brazil and China. The economy of countries shall be reshape accordingly, regarding that those who possess such technologies would have an edge on others in term of market competition and control.

There are a lot more to say i guess on others implications...

Hi,

my view on it is very simple : if what you have to report is confidential : do not present it during conference.

I agree with Nicolas Armanet

I think that depends, what i did is the schetch the conceptual logic structure and hide the details. to me, conference is really a double-blade, on one hand, it can help increase the impact of your work, however, on the other hand, indeed it causes the divulging problem.

I mostly agree with Angel Rivera, I'm not sure at all that anyone presenting new results in a conference, where attendents had to pay registration and travel, woyld like to see his/her recorded presentation anywhere in the web. I think that the main aim of a scientific conference is not that one, intelectual property must preserved in same way.

No. In research all presentations are subject to changes and updating. It is more appropriate to requeste the presenter by e-mail

How about asking the speaker? I agree with Nicolas Armanet's view to an extent, but on the other hand it hinders dissemination of ideas even at a general level. And don't we all enjoy hearing new things in meetings. Out of courtesy, I would not record a presentation without explicit permission.

Oh it’s very difficult to stop someone not to copy or record the results during a conference/seminar. What once a professor told me during my 3rd PhD seminar, to alter or give cumulative findings or results instead of displaying complete details. I think this could be a safe way. Otherwise one should allow for the recording.

Sure, why not. Because If a researcher present his work in front of some professional audience, then the data will no more a secret, it is just like a publish results.

In addition to Nicolas comments.If there is something confidential and its obligatory to present than speaker should request the audience for not taking the photos or videos.....

What is right or wrong here should be defined by the rules put in place by the sponsor or organizer of the event. If the rules are "no photos or video or audio recording" then there shouldn’t be the associated risk. If that were the case then the presenters could be a bit more open. If there are no such rules, then presenters should be more careful. Unfortunately, I have attended conferences where such rules were clearly present and yet several members in the audience blatantly violated them. We would hope the organizers would intervene but they did not. So, from a practical point of view it is advisable to hold back on anything you don’t want recorded, whether the rules permit such behavior or not.

I agree with Nicolas Armanet as well. If its really novel they should keep it confidential before publishing.

I think most conferences have the option of setting those ground rules. Sensitive data may be shared in many other ways. Having said that if it is truly trademark data or competition sensitive, why is it being shared in the conference? It has been my experience that closely held by invitation only "conferences" share the old fashion way or by opportunities for one on one interactions thru the use of breakout rooms.

If we are recording any presentation for understanding point of view then no problem. But if we add any important idea given by presenter in our research paper then this will be a plagiarism because its not our idea and we can't give a reference for same.

Ya by discussing with the host we can do it as nowadays in many of the journals we can give a reference of unpublished data .

How about this? you're there to present. So, you want to share the data then why refrain it from moving ahead. If it's so confidential that you prefer to keep it to yourself, then why present at a conference?

I believe that no incomplete data should be presented at conferences if you fear that bigger groups will steal your ideas. The right pathway is to show more final results or data in the process of being publicated or that cannot be patented. Tutors should advise young students accordingly, as you cannot really prohibit videos and photos.

I usually take pictures of most significant slides in important lectures during conferences... but of course I could ask the author for the whole presentation and I already have the paper that is published on the proceedings.

Really, if you don't want something in the 'public domain', don't present it.

Different universities have different requirements in order for students to graduate. Therefore, some students need to attend conferences and contribute a poster or a talk, others don't need it. And even when they do not have enough data for a complete paper, they need to make the presentation without having to write the paper. In such situations, their data need to be protected from videos and photos. Those that are published either have a patent application or a provisional patent submitted. Otherwise, those are still in the process of development but the students still need to comply with the inevitable school requirements.

There are two sides of the coin in this case.

1. The moment you present anything to the audience, it means that you have revealed your information to the audience. By doing this, we cannot say, i only tell you, but you should not remember this. It is up to the audience to remember or note it down or copy it.

2. The audience should be honest enough not to plagiarise others ideas and claim to be theirs. Or use the slides that they copy for his own presentation later. This will be unethical.

If the data is so novel and confidential, then it should not be presented in conference.

Sorry, but I don't agree with people who refuse to present novel ideas at conferences. Our focus should not only be on publications. It's not always easy to know what idea is novel/significant or not, a less than ordinary idea may be very attractive for someone in the audience. I think the main role of conferences is to spread and exchange ideas.

Zoraida Aguilar posted a stimulating question that seems to have provoke an interesting discussion. Thank you Zoraida. As I read through many of the responses I find fascination in some of them. Exelis Pierre presented what could exemplify a significant issue with IP sensitive and/or unpublished data  in open conference. On one hand I can understand the japanese gentleman's hesitation and complete denial of his material to those who requested it. On the other hand,  why did he presented it? Could there have been a better venue for the disclosure of his findings? Many pointed this out. As I see it, I understand that to a certain extent presenters do have a responsibility to themselves and those they represent. Nevertheless, as Dorina Kotoni and many others mentioned, if one is not ready to share ones work perhaps it would be more appropriate to withhold it until otherwise. This however, would  remain as a  point of contention since we, as scientist, often times feel compel to share concepts and findings out of excitement and instinct as a scientist. It is only when we are refrained by sensitivity issues affecting others to whom we owe our discretion that we find ourselves castrated by circumstances.  Zhing Ji's coment could provide us with a route of excape. Scethching conceptual logic and presenting that, may be a sound alternative. I do wonder however, what impact would this strategy and the lack of a full sets of supporting data would have on our reputations as researchers? After all, as Helia Jacinto points out, conferences do provide preliminary material , in the form of limited descriptions, (abstracts, papers, etc...) that are designed to attract the interest of peers. So then leaving somehting to be said about presentations lacking the level of detail we expect.

Conversly, why limit a speakers level of disclosure? Perhaps we could rely more on the audience integrity as Mustafa Ali Modn alluded to on the second point of his response. While I see it as naive on my part I do believe we could be a bit more respectful of others hard work and limit our participation as audience to simple notes, questions and humble approaches with honorable disposition towards those colleagues we choose to listen to. Could it be that scientific research is becoming a desperate race to get there first, to build reputation with disregard to the matter in wich is achieved?

yes, they should be allowed..... with due reference and acknowledgement.

That would be the purpose of presenting something at a conference if people are not allowed to see it. Photos and video will only help the people that attend the conference remember. Some people have photographic memory and other use Canon ©.

The very diverse responses reveals that we are simply HUMAN, with all the DEFECTS that are inherent to us. It become OBVIOUS that you are not confident about your colleagues. And with very good reasons. Unfortunately there are an increasing number of "researchers" that are prone to plagiarize the work of others. And we can't know in advance which one will be that one. I have seen my work stolen more than one time. Here we face a problem on ETHICS. And it seems that this word becomes a term more and more forgotten. What a shame and misfortune!

Indeed, the responses to this question are very diverse and these are as diverse as the reasons why people make presentations at conferences. Some present data that have been published which are not as exciting as those which have not been published. I for one like to hear about unpublished data where I can make an impact by asking questions and giving suggestions to improve the results of the project. As had been mentioned in more than one occasion in the discussions prior to this response we all have the obligation to respect our colleagues' areas of interest by being ethical. This means we listen, watch, provide criticism but we should not steal their ideas. Instead, we can follow their research and ask them to notify us when they publish the results at which time we can use their data to further seek answers to questions that we may have formulated after their presentation and this is before their publication. It is very stimulating to see how diverse we are in our thoughts and opinions regarding this matter. I for one would present new and raw data because experts with more experience than myself may provide insights that I may not be able to see and may miss altogether. Questions from the audience usually spur additional curiosity that I may have overlooked if I did not hear the audience talk about it. Overall, presentation of raw and unpublished data can result in positive things but taking videos and photos is not one of them. If the person interested in the talk is eager to learn about it, they should talk with the speaker and follow his/her publications instead.

Here's my short summary:

1. Don't present anything that you don't want others to know about. Why would you want to? If you don't fully understand the data it usually shows in the presentation. Also, once you present something it constitutes as the first public disclosure so you forfeit foreign patent rights, but still have 1 year in the US to patent the idea (this will be the case starting March 2013).

2. Why would the size of other groups matter? Also, isn't that the purpose of presenting your work, that is, to have other groups look at the data? I'm not sure why you would have this concern in the first place.

3. I support sharing the information, but I really don't like it. What I mean is I hate it when people stand there and take pictures of every slide; especially when I have animation and they take multiple pictures on the same slide. Its distracting to me when watching and when I'm giving presentations.

4.The answer to the issue is simple. Go up to the author after the talk and ask for a copy of the presentation. This can spark a discussion and the presenter will know who is getting his/her information. This is really the only justification for having conferences in the first place. If we don't talk with others in-person then why not just do it over the web.

I would say too : in case you want to share your presentation, but not want to be disturbed by pictures during your talk, you can even tell the audience before starting :

"this presentation is available for sharing ;

and all slides have their page number written,

if interested, just ask me after the session".

Hi Ewa,

Thank you for your ideas! It makes for very good discussion when researchers like you express your opinions.

Stolen idea for me means that someone uses your idea that came out of your presentation without acknowledging that you started it first. They use your data without properly referencing your paper or your abstract for a conference. Thus, they basically make it appear like the idea started with them or from their laboratory and not from you.

Hi Nicolas,

That is a very good plan. Are you going to share your presentation if it has unpublished data? Or are you going to talk about data that is already published?

As a graduate student, there was a very famous professor that I was very excited to go and listen to for the first time when I learned that he was presenting at the conference where I was. To my dismay, he presented already published data that I might have read five or more times because I was trying to learn from it so that I could apply the electrochemical principles to my own research. It would not have mattered much to me if his slides were made out of raw data but he used pages of the publication and pasted them on his slides. of course, I and I believe the rest of the audience, could not read from where we were because the font size on a journal publication, as you all know, is not conducive to power point presentation. My respect for the professor was diminished as a result of what I experienced from his presentation.

ok I understand your point.

But there's indeed no solution to this problem.That's simply several points of view. Anyway, people will always write ideas, or take pictures : that's the same.

On one hand, If you present already published data : no problem to share them (obviously it's better if you show visible results = not pages extracted from publications, thus sometimes unvisible, so respectless to the audience I'd say),

on an other hand, if you present new data not published yet, you have to know that it could be used by others with/without your agreement.

This is the game.

Consequently I think both data sharing are important :

- already published : continu to increase visibility of your work ; discuss the results ; make collaborations ; etc ...

- not yet published : show the others on what the group is working on ; discuss preliminary results ; express your doubts ; make collaborations ; etc ...

Thus to answer your 1st question : if I present unpublished data : yes I will share it ; otherwise I don't present it.

2nd question : yes I would talk about already published data : showing clear plots for examples, and citing where it has been published. In this case, I would rather give priority to conferences/workshops where it could be useful for the other scientists to know some results, and useful for me to get their points of view.

Finaly I would say : it's not because something is published that everyone knows the results. It's in my opignion, notably, the objective of conferences : make the discussion easier and accelerate the data flow / transfer.

I like your points of view, Nicolas. How old of a data are we supposed to present in conferences? How many times do we need to do that? Does it not get stale after sometime?

I agree with many of the previous posters. If you truly wish to have the research path you are on remain confidential for the time being, don't present it. I can see where this would be the case when possible financial gain is possible. The prospect of funding your own research is a strong one.

However, if you are looking for collaboration and would like to get fresh eyes on a topic consider inviting others to your location. If that isn't possible look into web conferencing. With all of the tools out there like EVO, Skype, and Google Docs it should be easy to share your work under confidentiality agreements.

@ Zoraida : thanks. Your 3 ? :

1st and 2nd ? : I think it depends on : your lab / institution, and/or collegues, and/or advisers/mentors, and/or your own : choices and philosophy.

3rd ? : I'd say : when the message (your results) has been given and received in key conferences and workshops, so that you obtained all the feedbacks (good, bad) : it's ok, enough, it's done. Now, let's go back to the lab and work !

Ok it's clear that my opignion on that, is from a young guy (I'm 32), who made only few conferences ; constructing is own vision thanks to what I've experienced myself and what other "young to old scientists" have experienced. My point of view could change in the futur ... but I hope not.

Yes ! Agree with Roman. Rapid communications or a letter are good ideas.

"arXiv" could be even an other solution, I think.

Trouble with rapid communication is that once you have completed the research, because of the rapid com, it becomes difficult to publish the full paper in good journals. The short rapid com does not have an equal value as the full paper, in my opinion and others may beg to disagree with me on it. Thus, the rapid com makes the full paper stale even before it comes out.

Interesting discussion. Actually, I believe this changed in the last couple of decades. I remember before going to a conference to show results, and then send the publication with them, except in extremely hot topics. Nowadays, it tends to be the opposite way: you send the publication first, then you show the (already published data) at the conference. This makes conferences less interesting, of course.

Thank you, Juan. I have seen people do this as well. I have no objections to this except when the paper being presented is 5 to 10 years old! Also, they have to use power point figures that are readable from afar and refrain from pasting sections of the manuscript on a presentation slide because this does not work at all.

Hi Ewa, I am glad to know that you are enjoying the exchange of ideas here. I believe that when more experienced researchers can share their views and ideas, the novice researchers can learn from it. The novice can pick up what they think is useful for them and leave the rest behind. Without this forum, such learning process, without going through it, making the mistakes, or doing it the hard way, will not be available. Hence, I welcome this RG media for all researchers to contribute their views regarding this question. All views are welcome and different people may adhere to different ways of doing and making their research available at conferences or in publications.

Restrictions due to IP could limit download of data at conferences. Look at the attachment what has been said on the matter in South Africa, even when you travel around the world.

Once, I have read a special acknowledgement from one published paper. It noted that the idea of the paper was inspired by the presentation of Prof. XXX at XXXX. To some extent, you could give an acknowledgement and list the people who gave the idea as a reviewer of your submission.

John, Thank you for the attachment. That is very helpful.

Moyuan, yes, that will be a very good thing to do when a researcher acknowledges the presentation that was used as a reference material. I have seen presentation abstracts as references as well.

If I had unique, edge-cutting results I would publish them in a journal for the first and then I would persent it on the conference. On the other hand, taking photos during conference is, in my opinion, inpolite. You can always ask speaker, for example during coffee break, to give You the power point file.

Wojcieh,

Thank you for your opinion. I agree that people can always speak with the speaker after the presentation. It allows for a good networking opportunity.

Yes, I cannot agree more with some of the comments here. Giving acknowledgement and citation of any conference presentations or proceedings is a respectable way. And, submitted for publication is a safe way for the author and presenter to protect their research ideas, this is what I was doing before any oral or poster presentation at any conference. Asking for PPT from presenters with their permission is a standard way to respect their' findings and make friends and seek collaborations.

Yangchao,

Thank you for your participation.

Do you always give the entire presentation to whoever asks you after you have presented? Or do you have a version that contains insensitive information for dissemination?

Zoraida,

Yes, I normally give the people who ask for my presentation the whole Slides but in PDF file format. I always include the publication information in the slides, such as the journal title, page number, etc. From my own experience, I always gave the presentation based on the published data or filed patent. So, for me, there is no need to hide something. Also, I am always happy to give people the slides in PDF file containing my publication, this is a good way, I believe, to let people know my research and cite my papers.

And when I am presenting a poster, I always print small, colour copies of poster and allow (or even encourage) people to takem them. I always put references to relevant publicaions in the poster, to ease the reader access to the data.

Yangchao and Wojcieh,

Thank you for your response. That is very nice of you both to do that for people who like to learn more about your research.

It is rather obligatory in my opinion. If there would be no information transfer, probably we had to chase mammoths for food ;-). Seriously, if You want to advertise somehow your results during the conference to find further partners in research and getting funds You have to spread somehow information about Your research. It is not only nice, but it also can give some profits in future.

According to idealists, our civillization will be facing numerous challanges in future and only scientists will be able to solve them. No one can solve a complex problem alone. For example, a Sci-Fi vision of Mars Terraforming - here numerous specialists from whole diversity of scientific subjects will have to cooperate. On the other hand - fossil fuels will probably end in next 100 years, so here also: chemists, engineers, economists will have to cooperate. Thus, promotion of cooperation and joint work as an idea should be spread.

Wpjciech.

You are absolutely right! In this world where we now know the complex interaction of various chemicals and materials in an organism or a cell down to the organelles and molecules composing them, we know that no single individual can work on one problem. It always has to be a collaborative effort not only among scientists but we must include the engineers, medical doctors, and mathematicians/statisticians and computer geeks to arrive at the best solution.

Zoraida,

Add here policymakers! Without proper funding the progress will stop. The policymakers should understand thank only thanks to the progress, we are not chasing mammoths / or not being chased by wolves :-)

Exactly! The policy makers give and take away the support whenever they feel like it! Not withstanding the possible effect on job status and ability of small businesses to survive, they reduce the small business grants whenever they want! And on top of that, they give the funds to whoever they please!

Its not always true beacuse the data is collected through analytical instruments following somme scientific principle.

Bit displaying a vedio will make the presentation atactive but may not be meaningful to the subject context.

Ewa, thank you for the invitation.

Dillip, I know that all data are gathered using instruments but the instruments cannot be purchased if there are not sources of funding for the researchers and faculty.

Taking video snap is not important but once it is duplicated for any further research with out referring the original contributor is unfortunate and should not be allowed under any circumstance.

This is the reason why I suggest that all conferences should include a choice for their participants to allow or disallow taking of videos or pictures before they submit their abstract. In this way, if they allow video or photo to be taken as they deliver their presentation, they can prepare the presentation without proprietary and new unpublished data.

I do agree with Zoraida.

Once data has been disclosed publically, there is no way either participant can claim IP. Ethics are simply irrelevant in this matter.

Anyway, I'd say that if someone wants to communicate on their results, or wants to be recognized for their work, they cannot, at the same time, ask people around to keep their mouths shut. You cannot have your cake and eat it... It's either you inform the community with what you found, and accept that people will make this information theirs, transform it and possibly benefit from it. Or you keep that for yourself, and have to accept that, for a while, no one will know about your genius...

At any rate, if someone tries to use yours results for their own benefit, they will not be able to claim novelty: ou will simply have to oppose their patent application with a reference to your presentation...

Finally, if a big group with bigger resources sees potential in your ideas, i'd consider this to be the best aknowledgment ever...

Thank you Denise. You are right. Once presented at a public conference outside the institution where the research took place, it is a disclosed information.

The researchers working on confidential projects are not allowed to present in any conference due to security reasons. That means whatever is being presented in the conference that is to reveal before them.

The main theme for the presentation and publication is the interaction and communication with other scientists working in the same or some what different research area. In spite of worrying about the copying of the idea or some data, we should believe on ourselves. If we accept such situation then what about the submitted paper where editor sent the manuscript to 2-5 referees (depending upon journals). Science first demand is ethics and discipline. There are few sites for example lanl.arxiv.gov where scientist post there articles before submission and its freely accessible. No body can steel any others idea and work. Science demand openness and sharing. Creative people always drive and those who believe in coping others work never excel.

Science will prosper only when honest peoples regulates thing. Scientist are also human beings and some time their universities and organizations put pressure on them to show publications/inventions. Its difficult to sustain this pressure and definitely few scientists did such tricks to be in the top level. I believe in learning and fusion of different ideas and I think presentation and sharing of knowledge is a good source to exercise such things.

Just to share an event, I was sitting in an ICTP Trieste Italy conferrence, a Japanese eminent Prof was giving lecture on strongly correlated electrons and during his lecture an Indian senior Prof (Dr Raychaudhry) stopped him and asked him the source of his last slide. Prof was not sure and then Dr Raychaudry told him that this slide is from his paper which was publsihed few years back. Situation was not pleasing and Japanese Prof apologize for that.

Presentation is a true source of learning and knowledge sharing can open brain windows for further good ideas.

Ethically we should acknowledge the intellectual idea of a person (a scientist) which we used in our work. Giving credit to the actual scientist can upraise our personal respect.

Muhammad, this is a very good addition to this question. Indeed everyone must acknowledge the source of their data, diagrams, etc whenever they make a presentation in the same way that such are acknowledged in papers.

Zoraida Aguliar and Ewa Lipczynska-Kochany, thank you for acknowledging my comments.

Now extending the above discussion that sometime the threat of scientific ideas stealing or referee injustice, these things are very common ongoing practices. If you allow me to quote the reference of Dr. Abdul Salam (Physics Nobel prize). His first nomination for the Nobel prize was turned down by the board committee. He in spite of this bad decision, keep on doing his research work and after few years he was again among nominees and then Nobel prize award. After he awarded Nobel prize the gentleman (referee) wrote exclusively that Salam also deserve first Nobel prize and it was his wrong judgment that Salam first nomination was turned down. We must salute that gentleman also for accepting his fault.

This is science culture and we need to follow such practices where as a researcher our top priority should be to be with our research and leave the results/awards to the nature.

Nadeem, I do agree with you and it should have open access.

Nadeem has nicely stated by quoting example of ICTP that it is not only that the presenter is to be worried about his data being stolen by capturing in photographing but he also has to be worried about presenting others data in public. In any case since most often the proceedings of conferences are recorded and published, the presenter author already has covered up his/her originality. Any subsequent reproduction will amount to plagiarism.

VK Jindal,

It is every where there and mostly in our country., which should be banned for the growth of scientific research.

My apologies if Muhammad Nadeem is supposed to be called Nadeem instead of Muhammad. Herein the US and int he Philippines, the first word out of one's name is how you get called in familiar terms. The last word in your last name and it is used when you are called in the formal form which would be with a Mr or Dr or Professor at the beginning and then your last name. Anyway. please correct me when I make a mistake in calling your names

Yes indeed, mistakes happen and this is because most scientists are too modest about their good work! This holds true for the majority of scientists and engineers especially those who are doing very good research! And a few people who are less creative and less productive or less successful use other people's results without acknowledging the real owners. This is a sad reality but it happens.

Zoraida its OK, my name is Nadeem and the meaning of this word is friend. So being friendly Nadeem is OK. Your above saying that good scientists are too modest can take hundreds of hundreds like. A good scientist earn his respect from this modest attitude.

Hi Nadeem, thank you. And I truly believe that it is really in the nature of scientists and engineers to be modest with their work.

Nadeem, there is no remarkable boundary to isolate good and bad scientist.A scientist is who establish the facts with his/her visionary accomplishment.

A conference is a place where scientists get opportunity to meet other scientists and thus share new findings. The fact that they do this, they know to what limit they open up. There is hardly any sensible possibility in these days to stop people to photograph. And it also is not very useful to ban photography. Ppl will scribble and they do. If there is sensitive methodology the scientist has to refrain from presenting. The purpose of a conference is to share the excitement and if possible views and criticism. For that sharing is a must and it is presumed that you have no hesitation in others storing it. So the presenter has to decide to what extent he or she should share.

Many times in India people request a copy of whole ppt. I find it very embarrassing.

Dilip Bisoyi, good mean technically good, as you rightly said who can accomplish his/her scientific ideas. Even those scientist who cant materialized there own vision but some time finds other way to be in the scientist line are not bad at least. The point which was raised by Zoraida Aguilar about the modest behavior of scientist/Engineers was actually extended by me by just adding good (from technical point of view) with the scientists. I hope my point of view is clear now.

Definitely no. It should not be allowed since conferences often are platforms to discuss yet unpublished material and thus should be kept confidential which means that it can not be used by others. Additionally, photos or videos can be misused for others's work. The potential problem of plagiarism has been mentioned here previously.

There may be one exception: the speaker has been asked for permission prior to photo or video taking. But even in this case, the question if this material can be presented to another wider public needs to be discussed.

The use of cameras and videos and the huge ethical problem they raise is indeed of concern. I recall a session in a BIT conference where the first invited speaker was swamped with photographers that were really outrageous - they were leaning over other people and impeding the audience ability to follow the talk both by physically being intrusive with flashes going off (I am surprised at the tolerance of some of the members in the audience). I gave the next invited talk and made it clear from the beginning that this was not allowed - still the same people began that process and I just stopped the talk until they stopped and I blasted those responsible directly - they looked furious and were red in the face and after five minutes began their activities again. These people could not be genuine researchers and their complete lack of ethics and despicable conduct made this conference one of the worst I had ever been. Yet I have seen this type of behaviour at many conferences so it's not an isolated problem (although flashes are being used less the ethical issue remains). Communities in general do have a very serious level of members who are simply unethical and who do not give a damn about their colleagues - they are totally against the community spirit of conferences. The photographing type is a more outward manifestation of a bigger problem perhaps. I think this community aspect is actually the most important reasons for stamping such conduct out - it's sad to think that our best researchers are often not presenting their best work .

Nadeem,

I feel you took the matter to personnel level which I explain for professional level.Every where there are good people,scientist,engineer and they never claim about themselves but it comes out automatically from their contributions.

Mr John Canning explained the issue explicitly regarding discipline and ethical part of the videos and photos during conference. His concern regarding the presentation where good researcher avoids to present best work is a real concern for the scientific community. I will really appreciate if some one extends and write how this concern can be addressed properly.

Nadeem & Ewa,

I feel the best solution for this problem is that every scientist must be Honest, integrity and sincere to his responsibilities.

Well said Ewa Lipszynska-Kochany, science is about sharing, if scientists need any betterment they should but not at the cost of sharing.