[okfn-discuss] Open Source movie definition

Tim Baumann jayday at gmx.de
Tue Mar 31 16:17:36 UTC 2009

An Open Source movie is a movie where:

1) The license of the movie is approved for Free Cultural Works. Specifically this is true for the Creative Commons licenses by and by-sa.

2) The materials used in the movie (sources) are also available under a license which is approved for Free Cultural Works.

3) The movie and its sources are made publicly available via an online download or by other means that are either free or with a cost that covers reasonable reproduction expenses only.

4) The sources should be viewable and editable with free/open source software. If this is not the case, they must be convertible into such a format by using free/open source software. The same applies to the movie itself.

5) It should be possible to re-create or re-assemble the movie using the source materials. ers reasonable reproduction expenses only.

> 1-3
> These 3 are in essence the contents of the Open Knowledge Definition:
> http://www.opendefinition.org/1.0/
> which in a nutshell says:
> 1. You should be able to get the work (in a modifiable source form)
> 2. You should get it under a license that allows for use, reuse and
> redistribution without restriction (other than, possibly, share-alike
> and attribution)
> (The OKD and the FCW definition are very similar in essence -- the two
> projects have been extensive contact with the OKD being developed
> slightly before the FCW definition and being slightly broader in
> focus).
> Regards,
> Rufus
I partly disagree. The point of the Open Source movie definiton is the 
availability of sources because film being a complex medium where many 
parts can be reused in other works only if the fhe respective source 
(and not the mashed-up final piece) is available (3d models, single 
shots, underlying music, screenplay, etc.). While the Open knowledge 
definiton is suitable for open (content) films it doesn't really require 
sources to be available. The def. of free cultural works does but as I 
wrote in a previous posting this def. is too demanding on the "free" part.

> It isn't clear to me from the requirements listed that a new
> definition is needed -- rather a guide to complying with the FCW/OKD
> for filmmakers.
> Mike
In recent years the term open source movie has become a big catchword 
for everything which is somehow cc licensed (best example is this one: 
http://www.archive.org/details/opensource_movies). So I felt that sth. 
should be done about and since I couldn't find any def. or theoretical 
work on it...

Regards, Tim

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/okfn-discuss/attachments/20090331/fd07fcd4/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the okfn-discuss mailing list