I’m here to write again of cybersecurity in a different point of view from the vision of other people can imagine.
Many persons asked me to talk about cybersecurity in a special session but for me it’s impossible.
In my experience of design contests, also online, I have learnt that the consolidated procedures exist and they belong to security and legal section than creativity. An example are the contests for industrial design where is obligatory that the project:
- doesn’t infringe the patents and copyright of others,
- didn’t publish,
- it remains unpublished until the exit of results and sometimes until the option of acquisition from the promoter of contest.
So happen either the contest platform or contest organization or candidates have to put in operation the procedures to prevent flight of news or other problems on projects before the exit of results. I can say that the iter doesn’t belong to creativity but meet the discourse of defence of company and personal assets.
One of common operation from candidate in contests is to evade the infringement of patent and copyright of others. In the course of development it’s necessary to verify the patent and copyright already registered from others in the right session further the registration of own patent for own works.
What happen if the machine of contest procedures is blocked?
In the unfortunate event the project is published before the exit of results or there are obstacles of other nature as the infringement of patent there is the answer doesn’t like to hear: EXCLUSION.
The conversation can be diluted and extremely tedious but can be interesting for many aspects similar to the procedures for contracts and subcontracts.
In a legal circuit none has interest to be excluded or elude the rules, unfortunately in some cases we assist to surpass the contests or contracts in non legal way.
An example for projectal contests: in the contest commission there couldn't be people who know the candidates for a question of impartiality.
With a contest commission known the candidates shouldn't partecipate to raise doubts, while in a commission unknown there are many problems. The board member can opt to renounce only in the case it know the presence of candidates known but not in the case they are anonymous so the contest organization have to verify there aren’t members in commmission and candidates they known themself.
We can see some example.
- If we have a student contest is obvious in the commission there will not be teachers can know them.
- It can happen that a board member and a candidate partecipated in the same public event and so they know themself each other.
It’s obvious in these two cases that if the contest organization has problems also after the exit of results if cannot verify. Also in this case it can be the exclusion of candidate either some persons from external raise the question or the contest organization decide to protect its company asset.
In the procedure of contract assigniment the problem rises in the case to bear market in the gare further others aspects of the gare can be similar to projectal contests.
The bear market had always raise problem because if they are more low there are doubts on the sostenibility of prices in comparison with standard price of construction and management and there could be various illegal behaviour.
Comments