[okfn-advisory] Open Knowledge positioning

Sun Mar 1 12:05:06 UTC 2015

+1!

Op zo 1 mrt. 2015 11:27 schreef Peter Murray-Rust <pm286 at cam.ac.uk>:

> I agree with general sentiments above.
>
> One of our unique features is the Open Definition (I am privileged to be
> on the advisory council). We often discuss aspects of law/technology which
> stop things being Open - these include DRM, legal restrictions on access to
> knowledge. It makes sense for use to be active in advocacy or al least
> awareness of thise issues most closely related to the actual practice of
> Openness.
>
> P.
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 1, 2015 at 1:41 PM, Nathan Torkington <nathan at torkington.com>
> wrote:
>
>> We faced the same thing at InternetNZ (we have the delegation for .nz and
>> use the profits for community grants, outreach, and policy work): there's a
>> lot that needs to be done around "the Internet" but, as a small
>> organisation, if we try to do it all then we'll end up accomplishing
>> nothing.
>>
>> The broad advice is
>>  * identify the issues that you can be the best at moving forward (the
>> About page: networking, opening, monitoring, education, stewardship)
>>  * identify a handful of issues that are aligned: you need them to
>> succeed, but you're unable to focus on that fight.  Have a single
>> broadly-stated public opinion on those issues but don't become the primary
>> voice for those issues; identify an organisation to whom you can refer
>> people seeking detailed comment.
>>  * everything else you have to hold fire on to save your ammunition for
>> where it will do the most good.
>>
>> Every organisation seeking to strengthen democratic governments ends up
>> faced with scope creep. Arguments like "but if communications are
>> tapped/DRM prevents individuals from controlling the technology they paid
>> for/women are not equally educated/homosexuality is forbidden/slavery is
>> quietly permitted/people are starving/... then how can you claim you're
>> challenging inequality and holding government to account?" are true at
>> their face, but it takes a cold heart and clear head to say "we need to do
>> one thing and do it well, and from there consider expansion; but if we
>> start out trying to do everything then we shall surely succeed at nothing".
>>
>> Nat
>>
>> On 27 February 2015 at 06:18, Daniel Dietrich <daniel.dietrich at okfn.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> I totally agree with Glyn that there are current struggles around
>>> several digital rights issues that will have significant affect on the work
>>> Open Knowledge foundation is focussing on at this times.
>>>
>>> I also agree with Laura, that we should remain having a focus on "our
>>> core" topics/expertise. But this does, in my view, by no means mean that we
>>> could/should not have a clearly expressed position on these other important
>>> topics. Although we might not wish to nor be able to take a leading role in
>>> each particular struggle (the later, I think, I agree with Hannes who made
>>> a point for focus).
>>>
>>> Again I think having a voice on other related digital issues doesn't
>>> mean losing focus. At this point I think, not all the issues have equally
>>> "direct affect" on our work/mission, e.g. privacy and surveillance perhaps
>>> have a little less direct affect than copyright reform, DRM or net
>>> neutrality (although I am aware that this is a terribly simplistic
>>> approach).
>>>
>>> At the end of the day the main question will be, how much resources we
>>> will be able and willing to dedicate to each of the topics. Why does the
>>> OKF not have a dedicated policy person on pay-roll? I think we should
>>> seriously think how we could cross-finance such a position to drive the
>>> agenda forward and have an adequate visible voice in those important
>>> debates.
>>>
>>> My2ct
>>> Daniel
>>>
>>> --
>>> Daniel Dietrich, co-founder & chairman
>>> Open Knowledge Foundation Germany
>>> www.okfn.de | info at okfn.de | @okfde
>>> Office: +49 30 57703666 0 | Fax: - 9
>>> Mobile: +49 176 32768530
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > On 22 Feb 2015, at 18:33, Laura James <lbjames at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Glyn,
>>> >
>>> > Thanks for starting this discussion!
>>> >
>>> > I'm quite torn on this topic, and look forward to hearing what others
>>> think.
>>> >
>>> > I agree the various 'digital rights' issues you mention are greatly
>>> important at the present time, and do intersect with Open Knowledge topics.
>>> There would be value in, say, advocacy work combining such issues, which
>>> would help raise the profile of the open knowledge piece with specialist
>>> campaigners in related areas.
>>> >
>>> > However, open knowledge remains a less well known issue than, say,
>>> surveillance, FOSS, and DRM. These other issues take (almost total)
>>> precedence for groups like EDRI, EFF etc, which is fine and understandable;
>>> but there are far fewer (civil society) groups pushing for openness. If we
>>> believe open knowledge matters in and of itself, then this is a message
>>> which needs spreading effectively and clearly. Open data, open access, etc,
>>> remain niche topics, little known or unknown or misunderstood outside their
>>> own communities. The misunderstandings include intentional openwashing,
>>> accidental misuse of the term 'open', and odd interpretations such as 'open
>>> data' being just about government data, or about economic growth.
>>> Broader understanding of the power and benefits of openness in a civil
>>> society context is essential to achieve our goals, and focussed
>>> communications will help here.
>>> >
>>> > Open Knowledge remains a fairly small organisation, undoubtedly with
>>> more limited resources than would be desirable. Focussing effort on open
>>> topics is likely to achieve better impact than trying to cover many topics
>>> with limited resource (especially as to be effective in each issue requires
>>> a level of up to date knowledge and expertise, which is challenging for a
>>> small team to maintain).
>>> >
>>> > On balance, then, I would look for focus on open knowledge topics day
>>> to day, taking advantage of opportunities with related fields when they
>>> arise and the capacity to do so is available. Longer term, with
>>> (anticipated) greater capacity and with wider comprehension of the basic
>>> message of openness, this could shift to more active engagement with and
>>> advocacy of related digital rights issues.
>>> >
>>> > Laura
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On 22 February 2015 at 10:47, glyn moody <glyn.moody at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > During last week's Advisory Council call, one issue that came up was
>>> > to what extent OK should be taking positions and engaging with areas
>>> > that affect its work, but which are not directly part of it.
>>> >
>>> > For example, currently there are important discussions taking place
>>> > around the world concerning copyright reform, DRM, Net neutrality,
>>> > surveillance, privacy, encryption, open source adoption etc.
>>> >
>>> > My view is that these are so far-reaching in their impact that it is
>>> > clear their outcome will affect OK in crucial ways.  I therefore
>>> > believe that it is legitimate and even necessary for OK to join the
>>> > debates, rather than to hold back from expressing its views, and to
>>> > risk seeing policies being adopted that are detrimental to OK's aims.
>>> > However, others feel that this kind of engagement is not appropriate
>>> > given the overall mission of OK.
>>> >
>>> > This is to invite others on this list to give their views on this
>>> issue.
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Best wishes
>>> >
>>> > Glyn
>>> >
>>> > http://opendotdotdot.blogspot.com
>>> > http://twitter.com/glynmoody
>>> > http://identi.ca/glynmoody
>>> > https://plus.google.com/+glynmoody/
>>> >
>>> > Please use PGP key servers (e.g. http://kerckhoffs.surfnet.nl/) to
>>> > confirm following:
>>> >
>>> > -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
>>> > Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
>>> >
>>> > mQENBFGhDsEBCADEBwqPh44LHDeNRMnifk5RTXMBmG5cjtrKuwm69hecZmdxy0t0
>>> > wlr4DMeEW/4Dfo73CXbu6cIXPDwY49bxXuu54xuuAHGzcj2iYNvgnIKGz+wpLH/+
>>> > OV2hCo1hK47/VLv6dd00ZrqrOPFvTYP/Hd8MvlSL3hv/0xtE8BBbU0i4e8ipRWL+
>>> > 3oCMGPaGnBQnyQqT3lpqAkUkWGCk72lHhmG9VFcOvr/vbCb2NGEZ7HJH1FxpRRkb
>>> > j1aMKKQJZvN+YfCwLUALjtVfqVuYsGO75MbWqp3PfAekDgUAhjdhsL+29ltuKdZ0
>>> > qjAY/ry9sdUVFbFgQs/LCqB/uxC5OEFWYWvNABEBAAG0IUdseW4gTW9vZHkgPGds
>>> > eW4ubW9vZHlAZ21haWwuY29tPokBPgQTAQIAKAUCUaEOwQIbIwUJCWYBgAYLCQgH
>>> > AwIGFQgCCQoLBBYCAwECHgECF4AACgkQrmu000rVU2GGmgf+KDWRTSZ90kzJwdfp
>>> > byrx4kwdU6ZrxZyyKFvatdn8s23zA6cenwV34j+BUYHbwAoq1rpaLoR2aCgpXSUb
>>> > +LOjHWUtgx1hc4hqLGleQYQF7oUsnxt0Ma8Kg52umwW/SwYizBDidVhaj9sYsc71
>>> > 2f7YyGlRsW+/1pxAOJqfPqYQ61OCTHTzY+NTQVn/b+82BL+y4GBK0iND+SLX7RUU
>>> > WcwT/3nscwJvVBkaJALOdSUZE5R+fta++FooWEF4tyoTjhNosItQV4syVFqrVQhQ
>>> > hWUkdlCbifelCVMSxoB1vhVHLFB1MyHx93rIAAP6W44PRn6CVsuldxO2TCJrbbbS
>>> > Psc1DrkBDQRRoQ7BAQgAsdRrdFqHFC0+40zlJxpqtGEX/XgAnA1WawpMFS8ih0qi
>>> > opfuRno+LaC5sNkPlfMbw2VsQfdH8JJHzJHwcbT5+FHBGqEf6aqHwSRTZWtz1yCk
>>> > 8i+Ju/9GG4mD00fCxOlyfNIIzsjzSpXRzJsqdVmGCOd3dMLjC63rkybB6iUqmSuW
>>> > WuUA6LGT7oxiKXv/aQc2Khwt70He48XTqmO/u5244wLPm7p04UiZfctZUsw/OR59
>>> > G+yAJKvadTVMmc4Dwz05OiWiOVzuWkIQpkwEH7xTRt+gRccg6/5B82rB1RBKJ3+r
>>> > 1oqSKGNO9RsBVFk3HXpcloUgmT88VWAKMQTueedgUQARAQABiQElBBgBAgAPBQJR
>>> > oQ7BAhsMBQkJZgGAAAoJEK5rtNNK1VNhSPYH/3zpn+ZaPTva7RoBNZuLPHI09kcV
>>> > 7+x9iEhyTm02NjTX5+fvwL2yyijzqKOfc7F7bTLE9EQEINSMJwzioU9MwLjd4j7X
>>> > rN8vrhlZP3MgcNaXeN6+pfw7ROf53baE6qJ0smonwyoUwHD8ewFEpFUqwEcIohh+
>>> > QTlhisqjyOT9BgzOIjqbbNSkImaN68q6Z7ChiDVe07FDhbIgZXFhimP9nx8jvfrB
>>> > x6iWQeeCqOpWXOCzQDIUgMwsW6UGxRnaA3AsQzMh3uCvzdNmTJdCwW6Ek16Feac5
>>> > 3YO3YDOzxC1+HftgvxfD5Yu8/7vOh//DCZTUQGzNZ9NCPaaa7mCeOp+dDfY=
>>> > =wFDl
>>> > -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > okfn-advisory mailing list
>>> > okfn-advisory at lists.okfn.org
>>> > https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-advisory
>>> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/okfn-advisory
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > okfn-advisory mailing list
>>> > okfn-advisory at lists.okfn.org
>>> > https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-advisory
>>> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/okfn-advisory
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> okfn-advisory mailing list
>>> okfn-advisory at lists.okfn.org
>>> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-advisory
>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/okfn-advisory
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> okfn-advisory mailing list
>> okfn-advisory at lists.okfn.org
>> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-advisory
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/okfn-advisory
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Peter Murray-Rust
> Reader in Molecular Informatics
> Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
> University of Cambridge
> CB2 1EW, UK
> +44-1223-763069
>  _______________________________________________
> okfn-advisory mailing list
> okfn-advisory at lists.okfn.org
> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-advisory
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/okfn-advisory
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/private/okfn-advisory/attachments/20150301/b4c91361/attachment-0003.html>