To not be a party to any agreement that unfairly limits or restrains access to the marketplace. So what does this mean, this is something, people online will ask themselves at some point.
Particularly if they want to speak about what it is they do, or how they achieved and got to where the readers might want to be. I will explain this as clearly as possible. I hope this helps, you may already understand this agreement, therefore you do not need to read this post, however I do think this valid and my research is merely based on creative commons openly online disclosed information. If you have a background in law this post will not entirely be of use especially on a local level. This post as a disclaimer again is simply exploring a question that had me stuck for a short while.
If you are researching the same thing and do not wish to be in breach of anything untoward then you may get something from reading this post, if anything it may save you a bit of time, surfing the internet and exploring Wikipedia . Members of associations and certain bodies need to understand these guidelines before they subscribe to these types of helpful organisations.
Predictively I will imagine this post will be perhaps to broad since the information is global and the different organisations that follow particular guidelines are governed at a more local level, ethically though this is not quite clear.
Understandably I will only be able to explain the basics, strangely enough I am still researching this topic today so if anything is missed out or irrelevant I welcome your input in the comments and apologise for creating any misconceptions to contribute to our understanding, I am sure though there is good reason why this has not been fully explained.
Since this post is just one explanation of the guidelines of actually conforming to just one of the ethical practises for wanna be keynote speakers, associates and those wanting to take the initial plunge into being accepted as a member, paid or concessionary. The last thing anyone needs is being in breach of there investments, but similarly should not be seen as something that should stop them in the path of progression, nor should it be a transference of information from a small fish to a larger fish, sadly I am afraid to say will happen.
That said, I am very grateful for information available and will keep it as brief as possible and do my utmost to honour the codes laid out by law in 2011. Subsequently, rather than send you all around the world globe trotting, or persuade you the value in future skills of having public speaking knowledge, I will just get on with explaining what you originally came to this post to read.
So what does not being a party to any agreement that unfairly limits or restrains access to the marketplace really mean. Lets brake it down, lets take a look at the historical implications and try a sift straight to today's standards and instrument some sort of clear statement that does not need explaining in a court of law and instills some common sense understanding of the basics, so we can begin practising ethical procedures and not be displaced in understanding the semantics (Strate, Fordham, 2011). This does happen, and if your education is restricting you from this as another disclaimer I do recommend you invest in your own education, if this is something you wish to do.
As you can probably see I am struggling with this question, so lets drill down further and reveal my findings, rather than set you up with more problems and contribute to the slowing down of your own progressional ethical code, which I am sure you have, which I know will develop overtime, which I also hope will make you a better person, more honest, understanding with a good knowledge of THE TRUTH ABOUT THINGS. Well versed in whatever you read, less inclined to waffle, more able to recognise knowing and identify someone who does openly not know.
The first thing we need to understand is copyright, now I know this is going to hurt a few people, that said copyright is there for a reason and its know different in personal or corporate copyright. However common law does differ across the globe. Wikipedia clearly states origins in two bodies within the topic of copyright. One is a convention and the other is a treaty, the morals change over the globe, so the literate among you will identify the need to distinguish between morals and ethics, but I will not be doing this today.
The second thing is identifying the modes and memes of your industry for which you may or may not get to expose your audience to further down the line of public speaking. Obvious answers are music, books, journals, coders, gamers, recreation and hospitality, mathematics, bankers and investors other blogs, other speakers, other dancers, movers, shakers these are just some who may be looking to make more business and understandably see value in the laws in place to protect there personal and corporate property tools and methods of approaching these communications.
One way of answering the question is going straight to the president of the bodies you wish to join, but this may come across as a complaint, but not understanding and complaining is very different so do not be intimidated by anything. Some things may seem like common sense but, ethics in society can differ depending on support, upbringing and determined by local educational methods. This will make you more inclined to relate with the local requirements, but may not give you an introspective model for understanding global retrospective jargon.
The memes (Dobbs or Dawkins, DobbsTown, 20th Century) of communication are the mediums in which communications and telephony takes place as it transfers between ideas and ambiguities (Stevens, The Media Coach, Sept 2011).
