[euopendata] Fwd: Open Knowledge Definition,

[Paola Di Maio]

>


Antti

>
> All definitions are somewhat limited by nature, in the limitations remain
also their strength. Definitions limit some important aspects of often
complex phenomena into compact and understandable form.


Yes of course.Definitions are a type of lexical boundary, with all the
implications that follow. But it looks to me that the adoption of a single
definition (OKD) by a community (OKFn) should not be confused for the only
valid boundary for the entire universe of discourse on that topic for the
rest of the world :-)


>
> It's good that you raised this question, I would like to here more
specifically which limitations you consider most important in OK Definitions
and what other usable definitions you know which extends the coverage.


That's a loong answer.  First issue I come across are the issues under
debate on this list. Some of us have been promoters of Open Knowledge for a
long time, yet have not been in the OKFn loop until recently crossing wires
on common ground

One argument is mentioned here

http://www.bgsu.edu/cconline/open/avoiding-freedom-argument.html

( here's the link to the actual post cited

http://opencontent.org/blog/archives/1511)


More references for alternate definitions

Open Access as defined in the  Berlin Declaration on  Open Access to
Knowledge in the  Sciences and  Humanities (2003)

http://www.zim.mpg.de/openaccess-berlin/berlin_declaration.pdf

 and the  Bethesda Statement on Open Access Publishing (2003)



A more personal perspective:

Authors,   creative innovators, and even inventors  need to make sure that
the product of their creativity is rewarded if it contributes to wealth
generation, and if they have to make a living at it, and continue to be
creative..


 I am not sure how familiar is this list with the history of author's
rights. Authors throughout centuries have been living and dying in misery,
because their work was exploited but not financially rewarded, Author's
rights (moral and economic)  were introduced less than one hundred years ago
to ensure that people producing brilliant ideas would not be robbed by the
industry those ruling the economy , and that by law they had the right to a)
attribution b) corresponding shares of revenues generated



from

http://people.mokk.bme.hu/~bodo/szabalyozas/irodalom/The%20Berne%20Convention%20Between%20Authors.doc
.


Economists who have tried to come to grips with authors' rights tend to
agree that their intended purpose (as most generally phrased and with regard
to promotion of economic efficiency) is to create incentives that will cause
a maximum difference between the value of the result of the creative efforts
involved and the social cost of its creation, with the cost of the
administration of the system included.


As both a creative innovators, author AND open knowledge advocate, I would
say that authors (of which I am one) can comfortably embrace 90 percent of
the OKD,


The particular OKD clause

The license shall not require a royalty or other fee for such sale or
distribution


is arbitrary, unacceptable and unjustified.  Is there a record to show who
put that clause in there and why and following what arguments? (I would
guess some big global record company shareholder behind that clause, just by
looking at it :- )

There's surely lot more to unpack under this particular topic



>

>> Besides, the fact that the open knowledge definition is not 'open' is a
bit of paradox itself, how can people contribute to expand it and make it
more realistic ? Is there a revision due?
>
> This is very good point, I believe that some sort of revision process
could serve the purpose.

>

Antti, note that I am very interested in this, especially if the OKF
community grows it may need to expand its knowledge and understanding of the
historical and economic context it operates in .

However I have very limited time to reply to posts, as I have tons of work
on my desk that demand my attention :-(. I
 will contribute to future revisions of the OKD if I can, provided I can do
so 'economically' ,

I apologise in advance if I do not manage to follow up promptly on
developments of this and other threads

 Keep us posted.

Cheers

PDM
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/euopendata/attachments/20110115/85c05f49/attachment-0001.html>