DS Doesn't "Get" Blogging

Dassault Systemes launches a new blog, "3D Perspectives: A casual talk about 3D & innovation out of the cloud." 

Official Blogger Kate Bourdet writes casually enough in her early postings, describing Dassault's philosophy, design, and so on. DS tends to be one of the more secretive CAD companies, and so I looked forward to reading this new blog.

But when it comes time to read the blog and leave comments, look out!

Beware the Blog Chart

Blogging is all about conversation, but lawyers hired by Dassault have effectively shut it down. Before reading a single word, you have to agree to the Blog Chart (whatever that means. Sounds like something from Monty Python's Holy Grail: "To complete this task, you -- must -- read -- the -- Chart!" "Oh no, not the Chart!").

The Chart, it starts off bad...

By visiting the Blog, by using the Blog and by uploading content, you agree to be bound by the following Chart [the what?]. If you do not agree with any of the terms of this Chart [the what?], please do not use the Blog.

...and it gets worse...

8. Any user of the Blog may report to DS any Content or any comment in one of the Blog [sic] that he [sic] believes constitute [sic] an offense by sending a notification by Registered Letter Return Receipt Requested at [sic] the following address: Dassault Systèmes, DS “PR and Media Relation” Department, Attn Kate Bourdet, 10 rue Marcel Dassault CS 40501, 78946 Vélizy-Villacoublay. This notification must be dated and must include:

• The lastname, firstname, profession, address, nationality, date & place of birth of the user and, if corporation [sic]: legal form, corporate name, registered office, representative ;
• A description of the offense reported and the exact URL or a description of where the alleged offense is located ;
• A statement by you of the merits of your request to withdraw the alleged content (with the facts & legal texts related to this request);
• Whether a copy of the mail sent [sic] previously to the author or to the editor of the alleged content requiring withdrawal or modification, or the justification [sic] that the author or editor couldn’t be reached.

Whatever happened to leaving comments, objecting to the comments of others -- aka, "freewheeling blog discussion"? (cf: PTC users angry about my comments on the sale of the company.)

Not in the rarefied air surrounding Vélizy-Villacoublay, France, apparently, where the right of free speech (aka dissent) seems to have become a legal matter to be smothered by bureaucratic paperwork and wrapped tightly in red tape. 

Here's a free tip for Dassault: blogging software allows you to delete offensive comments. You can even preview comments before they are posted. No Registered-Letter-Return-Receipt-Requested required. 

I don't agree to the Chart (the what?); I'm not reading the writings of Mme Bourdet. 

Comments

[Matt Lombard]

Doesn't really suprise me. Big corporations don't like these "common man" type tools, because they level the playing field.

She seems to think, like other market players that CAD does design somehow. Design happens in your head, not in your CAD.

[Robin Capper]

If those are the rules for "A casual talk..." what is the framework for a formal talk?!

[Kate]

Hi Ralph. We’re headed for casual, so I’m sorry you felt jolted by the blog chart. It’s a big-corporation formality, and we decided to be up front that it exists rather than burying it somewhere on the blog. In the 3DSports blog, it was set up the exact same way, but in the few months I regularly posted there, we had around 100 comments. http://share-sports.3ds.com/ So I’m surprised it may seem a blocking factor at 3D Perspectives, although I understand and appreciate your point. I invite you to leave some comments on the blog itself. You’ll see I accept critical feedback, as I’ve done with our first two comments. I also accept positive feedback. ;-)

[al dean]

Most countries don't have any formalized freedom of speech Ralph. And its to do with liable. if someone went off on any of our web-site, they'd get plugged. As a publisher, you're subject to legal action if its slanderous. and its going to come to a blog near you soon - some companies are already suing people over reviews left on amazon...

the chart's funny stuff though - did they mean charter..

strange how some companies see blogging as a broadcast medium (and to be fair, so do a lot of bloggers), rather than a method of discussion

[Brian]

"If those are the rules for 'A casual talk...' what is the framework for a formal talk?!"

LoL, Robin. This is clearly why Dassault deals are so long and complicated. Just refer to the chart (the what??)

[Kate]

Hi again. I wanted to send you an immediate answer (thus my previous one), but meanwhile I’ve taken off the blog chart. The sentence is gone too. Instead you’ll see the web terms of use in the footer, so please comment away. We’re sincere about the discussion bit.

You see, DS can change, and in 24 hours too! ;-) Thanks for helping us to see and fix it! Best, Kate

[Steve Johnson]

Ralph, did you know that by linking to the site, you have violated the terms of use of that site? See section 6 here:

http://www.3ds.com/terms-of-use/

Oh no, now I've done it too! I have violated the following terms:

- I have not obtained prior written permission.
- I have not linked to the home page.
- I have linked from a site that is not owned by me.
- My site almost certainly does contain content that is considered controversial towards a third party (whatever that means). So does yours, Ralph.

DS, I openly admit this blatant violation of your terms. In fact, in an R. Paul Waddington-style move, I hereby publicly announce my intention to fully reject your terms and yet continue using your site anyway. Actually, I'll probably never visit it again, but never mind that. Sue me!

[Tony Tanzillo]

While the language is a bit entertaining, it's at least explict. It's not like Autodesk's license agreement, where you are doing without realizing it, is explicitly granting Autodesk the legal right to spy on you (e.g., what they call 'audit').

In case anyone didn't notice, the language in the license agreement effectively requires that you surrender your right to privacy, to Autodesk.

[chris]

You got to love the fact that they had a conversation to decide "if" they should put a license agreement on their blog... You can just picture a bunch of people sitting around with the lawyers deciding what this agreement should say. I can see some saying "ya,but, someone might say something bad about us... we cannot let that happen". I guess I better get to work on the license agreement for www.vuuch.com and it's blog www.vuuch.com/wordpress.

[R. Paul Waddington]

Tony, you are correct in what you say about Autodesk's terms and conditions: but there is a good ending to this - if only for me.

The declaration published in my blog - Caveat Emptor - mirrors a letter sent to Autodesk and it has not been challenged.

My purchasing terms and conditions reflect the same conditions and as a result I now am, probably, the only person on the planet using Autodesk software without any obligations to Autodesk - absolutely NONE!.

I had wished for a better outcome, one that would have benefited both Autodesk and their customers but it proved to big an ask to get others to stick out their necks collectively to get the correct outcome, so I chose to go it alone to prove what can be done.

Whilst a different situation to that of we users, of Autodesk software, Vernon's outcome, I believe, confirms much about the un-enforceability of Autodesk's terms and conditions.

Users of Autodesk software are designers of new 'ideas and things' and yet both their tool supplier and the customers have been completely 'rooted to the spot', terrified of the attempt and or completely unable to navigate thru' what is a very simple process of negotiation?????

The 'Gorilla' everyone seems to fear is nothing more than a collective of completely stubborn people who think they have the right to to DEMAND - from the people who pay their salaries - unreasonable and unconscionable conditions of use that they themselves would NOT personally accept; and they do this shielding behind a mask entity called Autodesk; and they have been proven wrong!

[Steve Johnson]

To be fair to DS, I've violated Autodesk's terms, too. The Autodesk terms are almost as silly as the DS ones:

http://usa.autodesk.com/company/legal-notices-trademarks/linking-to-autodesk/consent-for-linking

Autodesk's terms are not quite as LOLworthy as the DS idiocy, but they are not that far off, and are certainly just as unenforceable.

For example, anyone who has anything on their site that is disparaging about Autodesk, its products or its services is not allowed to link to Autodesk's site. Anyone who uses the terms AutoCAD, Autodesk, AUGI, DWG(!), etc. without prior written permission is a violator. Same applies to anybody who uses Autodesk's trade dress. Presumably, that doesn't mean that smart outfit Carol Bartz once wore to a building industry convention.

If Autodesk starts suing all the on-line violators of terms like that, California is going to run out of lawyers. As I've said elsewhere, what a crock!