NAFA Legal Disclaimer?

[Stacia Novy]

I received the December 2014 Hawk Chalk (HC) and was surprised to see the Legal Disclaimer on page 1. This disclaimer was not published in previous HC issues. The disclaimer contradicts NAFA’s own mission statement, also listed on page 1.

Quoting the mission statement: “…our purpose is to provide communication among and to disseminate information to interested members; to promote scientific study of raptorial species, their care, welfare and training…”

In opposition, the legal disclaimer states “….NAFA takes no responsibility for the factual accuracy of the information contained in material submitted for publication…”

The legal disclaimer effectively dismisses NAFA's mission statement as an organization. It seems to me that the dissemination of any information that is inaccurate or non-factual is counter-productive to NAFA members, and does nothing to promote good communication within the club.
Does anyone else have thoughts on this issue?
Stacia Novy

[Saluqi]

Where is the contradiction Stacia? First off, the NAFA publications are not peer reviewed scientific journals, therefore, we must state that up front in the disclaimer. Secondly, articles written by falconers are that falconer's opinion, whether that be regarding a method of training, or a personal hawking story, NAFA as an organization, can not vouch for the factual truth such information.

Several years ago, here on NAFEX, someone stated that there was some mistake in a NAFA Journal article, and that what the author of the article had written was not correct from a biologic point of view. Well, that comment was 100% correct, because it was the author's opinion, and not peer reviewed information.

“…our purpose is to provide communication among and to disseminate information to interested members; to promote scientific study of raptorial species, their care, welfare and training…”

“….NAFA takes no responsibility for the factual accuracy of the information contained in material submitted for publication…”

[steveo_uk]

I think Stacia problem is with nafa itself. Seems 2 of their 3 posts are about nafa and nothing else

[falcon56]

Where is the contradiction Stacia? First off, the NAFA publications are not peer reviewed scientific journals, therefore, we must state that up front in the disclaimer. Secondly, articles written by falconers are that falconer's opinion, whether that be regarding a method of training, or a personal hawking story, NAFA as an organization, can not vouch for the factual truth such information.

Several years ago, here on NAFEX, someone stated that there was some mistake in a NAFA Journal article, and that what the author of the article had written was not correct from a biologic point of view. Well, that comment was 100% correct, because it was the author's opinion, and not peer reviewed information.

“…our purpose is to provide communication among and to disseminate information to interested members; to promote scientific study of raptorial species, their care, welfare and training…”

“….NAFA takes no responsibility for the factual accuracy of the information contained in material submitted for publication…”

Paul,
Why something like this has to be explained is beyond me, seems she is just looking for a reason to find fault. Considering Swifts recent letter to the editor in the August HC, which is absolute BS and reeks of sour grapes, I think NAFA's stance is more than reasonable and not unexpected. You certainly broached it in a much more Pol. Correct manner than I would have!
Ray

[Stacia Novy]

Where is the contradiction Stacia? First off, the NAFA publications are not peer reviewed scientific journals, therefore, we must state that up front in the disclaimer. Secondly, articles written by falconers are that falconer's opinion, whether that be regarding a method of training, or a personal hawking story, NAFA as an organization, can not vouch for the factual truth such information.

“….NAFA takes no responsibility for the factual accuracy of the information contained in material submitted for publication…”

Paul, the full Legal Disclaimer could be deconstructed, but that would be beyond the scope of this forum; instead I’ll consider 3 points to reveal contradictions:
1. NAFA’s refusal to accept any responsibility for its publications is disturbing; a basic function of editors and editorial committees (ECs) is to ensure that ethics, accuracy and factual content of material are acceptable. NAFA has these entities: editors and an EC. To dismiss this inherent responsibility is contradictory and unrealistic. Why assign editors and create an EC if NAFA is going to strip them of these vital roles? In so doing, NAFA could be, knowingly or unknowingly, perpetuating propaganda, hearsay and/or rumors. This is hardly “…promoting [good] communication and information among members…”

2. “…to promote the scientific study of raptors…” Granted, NAFA is not peer-reviewed, but NAFA should check that published studies are, at the very least, factual (eg, that the research took place, is original and that references were cited) if NAFA is going to promote research in any form. Some responsibility must be taken to ensure that these basic standards are followed. For instance, past raptor veterinary articles were referred to Dr. Pat Redig for review prior to NAFA publication. This protocol should be followed for scientific studies too.

3. Plagiarism or Unauthorized Use of Material. If NAFA published material that was plagiarized or used without the copyright owner’s consent, NAFA could still be liable for damages, despite the legal disclaimer. Thus, NAFA, the editors and EC should make an attempt to verify information and ownership of submitted material prior to publication. Simply deflecting responsibility or accountability may not absolve these transgressions. Stacia

[DtRooster]

Somebody needs a life other than their own because it's obviously not fulfilling enough crazyy

[MrBill]

I received the December 2014 Hawk Chalk (HC) and was surprised to see the Legal Disclaimer on page 1. This disclaimer was not published in previous HC issues. The disclaimer contradicts NAFA’s own mission statement, also listed on page 1.

Quoting the mission statement: “…our purpose is to provide communication among and to disseminate information to interested members; to promote scientific study of raptorial species, their care, welfare and training…”

In opposition, the legal disclaimer states “….NAFA takes no responsibility for the factual accuracy of the information contained in material submitted for publication…”

The legal disclaimer effectively dismisses NAFA's mission statement as an organization. It seems to me that the dissemination of any information that is inaccurate or non-factual is counter-productive to NAFA members, and does nothing to promote good communication within the club.
Does anyone else have thoughts on this issue?
Stacia Novy

I agree with you, Stacia. I think they ought to remove the disclaimer rather than try and negate responsibility for what is published; after all, we are simply talking about a club newsletter, not a scientific journal. The vast majority of the articles are either "how to," or opinion pieces. There is nothing that rises to the level of information that one would normally find in a scholarly, peer-reviewed, publication.

BTW, you still have not answered my question: Do you apply for the HC editorial job that was recently filled? Thanks.

Bill Boni

[falcon56]

Stacia,
Just what exactly is your motivation and or agenda for starting this and the thread condemning the photos used on the December HC? Personally, I feel both these threads of yours qualify as probably within the top 5 wastes of time and most inane ever started on NAFEX, not only for those reading them, but for you to have felt it necessary to start them. Criminately, with all that is going on, not just within the falconry community but the world as a whole, this is the cause you decided to champion? You have to have more important things going on in your life. Jeeze, Louise.

[DtRooster]

Exactly Bill. There's nothing scientific or indisputable about falconry at all. Unfortunately disclaimers are needed for everything in today's 'not my fault because he said' sue happy world

[josephpravong]

Stacia,
You have to have more important things going on in your life. Jeeze, Louise.

thumbsupp

[Stacia Novy]

Exactly Bill. There's nothing scientific or indisputable about falconry at all. Unfortunately disclaimers are needed for everything in today's 'not my fault because he said' sue happy world

Lew, I agree that this world is filled with “lawsuit-happy” people and that NAFA needs some measure of protection; however, I think the printed legal disclaimer was inappropriately stated. If one was needed, a simple admittance like the following would’ve sufficed: “The opinions and views of individual authors in this publication do not necessarily reflect the opinions and views of the North American Falconers Association.” I’ve seen statements like these in many organizational media.
While similar wording was used in NAFA’s disclaimer, the Association continued on with a paragraph-long, sweeping blanket statement negating any and all responsibility for its publications. As I already noted, this is unrealistic and contradictory. When an agency dismisses any and all accountability for its actions, it invites scrutiny and questioning from the membership and the public.

Furthermore, all-capital lettering was used in portions of the disclaimer, making it appear as if NAFA Leadership is YELLING AT THE MEMBERSHIP. This makes NAFA appear reactive and defensive. Stacia

[falcon56]

Now NAFA is yelling at it's membership? Good God, Stacia, give it up and find something worth while to waste your energies on instead of finding fault with an org. that has done way too much for you to practice falconry.

[FredFogg]

Stacia, are you a lawyer? You do know that NAFA has legal council? Maybe you should be directing these questions to James Maynard, his contact info is on the NAFA website.

[Chris L.]

Hello

I am going to close this thread as NAFEX is not the place to discuss NAFA legal issues or business. Yes I do have a NAFA forum as a courtesy to the organization but said forum is not the place for this type of discussion. In addition, this type of discussion detracts from NAFEX's mission. Please direct further correspondence with NAFA itself.


Thank you for understanding

Kindest regards

Christopher Lynn