No subject
Thu Oct 25 19:26:07 UTC 2012
organized by UNESCO, I am not sure people involved were aware of the
problems of these restrictions.
Tom
2012/11/26 Everton Zanella Alvarenga <everton.alvarenga at okfn.org>
> An interesting text by Stallman, which I copy bellow and emphasize some
> points in italic. We could improve the article on permission culture at
> Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permission_culture
>
> See also a recent post by Rufus
> http://blog.okfn.org/2012/10/04/making-a-real-commons-creative-commons-should-drop-the-non-commercial-and-no-derivatives-licenses/
>
> *On-line education is using a flawed Creative Commons license*<http://stallman.org/articles/online-education.html>
>
> Prominent universities are using a nonfree license for their digital
> educational works. That is bad already, but even worse, the license they
> are using has a serious inherent problem.
>
> When a work is made for doing a practical job, the users must have control
> over the job, so they need to have control over the work. This applies to
> software, and to educational works too. For the users to have this control,
> they need certain freedoms (see gnu.org<http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html>),
> and we say the work is "free" (or "libre", to emphasize we are not talking
> about price). For works that might be used in commercial contexts, the
> requisite freedom includes commercial use, redistribution and modification.
>
> Creative Commons publishes six principal licenses. Two are free/libre
> licenses: the Sharealike license CC-BY-SA is a free/libre license with
> copyleft <http://www.gnu.org/copyleft>, and the Attribution license
> (CC-BY) is a free/libre license without copyleft. The other four are
> nonfree, either because they don't allow modification (ND, Noderivs) or
> because they don't allow commercial use (NC, Nocommercial).
>
> In my view, nonfree licenses are ok for works of art/entertainment, or
> that present personal viewpoints (such as this article itself). Those works
> aren't meant for doing a practical job, so the argument about the users'
> control does not apply. Thus, I do not object if they are published with
> the CC-BY-NC-ND license, which allows only noncommercial redistribution of
> exact copies.
>
> Use of this license for a work does not mean that you can't possibly
> publish that work commercially or with modifications. The license doesn't
> give permission for that, but you could ask the copyright holder for
> permission, perhaps offering a quid pro quo, and you might get it. It isn't
> automatic, but it isn't impossible.
>
> *However, two of the nonfree CC licenses lead to the creation of works
> that can't in practice be published commercially, because there is no
> feasible way to ask for permission. These are CC-BY-NC and CC-BY-NC-SA, the
> two CC licenses that permit modification but not commercial use.*
>
> *The problem arises because, with the Internet, people can easily (and
> lawfully) pile one noncommercial modification on another. Over decades this
> will result in works with contributions from hundreds or even thousands of
> people.*
>
> *What happens if you would like to use one of those works commercially?
> How could you get permission? You'd have to ask all the substantial
> copyright holders. Some of them might have contributed years before and be
> impossible to find. Some might have contributed decades before, and might
> well be dead, but their copyrights won't have died with them. You'd have to
> find and ask their heirs, supposing it is possible to identify those. In
> general, it will be impossible to clear copyright on the works that these
> licenses invite people to make.*
>
> *This is a form of the well-known "orphan works" problem, except
> exponentially worse; when combining works that had many contributors, the
> resulting work can be orphaned many times over before it is born.*
>
> To eliminate this problem would require a mechanism that involves asking
> _someone_ for permission (otherwise the NC condition turns into a nullity),
> but doesn't require asking _all the contributors_ for permission. It is
> easy to imagine such mechanisms; the hard part is to convince the community
> that one such mechanisms is fair and reach a consensus to accept it.
>
> I hope that can be done, but the CC-BY-NC and CC-BY-NC-SA licenses, as
> they are today, should be avoided.
>
> Unfortunately, one of them is used quite a lot. CC-BY-NC-SA, which allows
> noncommercial publication of modified versions under the same license, has
> become the fashion for online educational works. MIT's "Open Courseware"
> got it stared, and many other schools followed MIT down the wrong path.
> Whereas in software "open source" means "probably free, but I don't dare
> talk about it so you'll have to check for yourself," in many online
> education projects "open" means "nonfree for sure".
>
> Even if the problem with CC-BY-NC-SA and CC-BY-NC is fixed, they still
> won't be the right way to release educational works meant for doing
> practical jobs. The users of these works, teachers and students, must have
> control over the works, and that requires making them free. I urge Creative
> Commons to state that works meant for practical jobs, including educational
> resources and reference works as well as software, should be released under
> free/libre licenses only.
>
> *Educators, and all those who wish to contribute to on-line educational
> works: please do not to let your work be made non-free. Offer your
> assistance and text to educational works that carry free/libre licenses,
> preferably copyleft licenses so that all versions of the work must respect
> teachers' and students' freedom. Then invite educational activities to use
> and redistribute these works on that freedom-respecting basis, if they
> will. Together we can make education a domain of freedom.*
>
> --
> Everton Zanella Alvarenga (also Tom)
> Open Knowledge Foundation Brasil
>
--
Everton Zanella Alvarenga (also Tom)
Open Knowledge Foundation Brasil
--e89a8f923da210b7b604cf794857
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi all.=A0<div><br></div><div>I've sent Stallman text to this Open Educ=
ational Resources mailing list, runned today by Athabasca University, but p=
reviously by UNESCO</div><div><br></div><div><a href=3D"https://deimos.cs.a=
thabascau.ca/mailman/listinfo/oer-community">https://deimos.cs.athabascau.c=
a/mailman/listinfo/oer-community</a></div>
<div><br></div><div>and I do think it's important to convince people th=
ere on the problems of the NC and ND restriction. There is some discussion =
going on <<a href=3D"https://deimos.cs.athabascau.ca/mailman/private/oer=
-community/2012-November/000469.html">https://deimos.cs.athabascau.ca/mailm=
an/private/oer-community/2012-November/000469.html</a>> (password requir=
ed, I will ask them to open, the previous one wasn't closed) and I thin=
k it is important to have UNESCO with a clear idea on the best definition o=
f open.</div>
<div><br></div><div>From the last OER meeting in Brazil before the Paris me=
eting, both organized by UNESCO, I am not sure people involved were aware o=
f the problems of these restrictions.</div><div><br></div><div>Tom</div>
<div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">2012/11/26 Everton Zanella Alvarenga <s=
pan dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:everton.alvarenga at okfn.org" target=3D=
"_blank">everton.alvarenga at okfn.org</a>></span><br><blockquote class=3D"=
gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-=
left:1ex">
<span style=3D"color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-se=
rif">An interesting text by Stallman, which I copy bellow and emphasize som=
e points in italic. We could improve the article on permission culture at W=
ikipedia=A0</span><a href=3D"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permission_cultur=
e" style=3D"color:rgb(17,85,204);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-seri=
f" target=3D"_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permission_culture</a><sp=
an style=3D"color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif=
">=A0</span><div>
<br></div><div>See also a recent post by Rufus=A0<a href=3D"http://blog.okf=
n.org/2012/10/04/making-a-real-commons-creative-commons-should-drop-the-non=
-commercial-and-no-derivatives-licenses/" target=3D"_blank">http://blog.okf=
n.org/2012/10/04/making-a-real-commons-creative-commons-should-drop-the-non=
-commercial-and-no-derivatives-licenses/</a><br style=3D"color:rgb(34,34,34=
);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">
<br style=3D"color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-seri=
f"><a href=3D"http://stallman.org/articles/online-education.html" style=3D"=
color:rgb(17,85,204);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif" target=3D=
"_blank"><b>On-line education is using a flawed Creative Commons license</b=
></a><div style=3D"color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,san=
s-serif">
<br><div><span style=3D"font-family:'Times New Roman';font-size:med=
ium">Prominent universities are using a nonfree license for their digital e=
ducational works. That is bad already, but even worse, the license they are=
using has a serious inherent problem.</span></div>
<div><p style=3D"font-family:'Times New Roman';font-size:medium">Wh=
en a work is made for doing a practical job, the users must have control ov=
er the job, so they need to have control over the work. This applies to sof=
tware, and to educational works too. For the users to have this control, th=
ey need certain freedoms (see=A0<a href=3D"http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/fr=
ee-sw.html" style=3D"color:rgb(153,0,221)" target=3D"_blank">gnu.org</a>), =
and we say the work is "free" (or "libre", to emphasize=
we are not talking about price). For works that might be used in commercia=
l contexts, the requisite freedom includes commercial use, redistribution a=
nd modification.</p>
<p style=3D"font-family:'Times New Roman';font-size:medium">Creativ=
e Commons publishes six principal licenses. Two are free/libre licenses: th=
e Sharealike license CC-BY-SA is a free/libre license with=A0<a href=3D"htt=
p://www.gnu.org/copyleft" style=3D"color:rgb(153,0,221)" target=3D"_blank">=
copyleft</a>, and the Attribution license (CC-BY) is a free/libre license w=
ithout copyleft. The other four are nonfree, either because they don't =
allow modification (ND, Noderivs) or because they don't allow commercia=
l use (NC, Nocommercial).</p>
<p style=3D"font-family:'Times New Roman';font-size:medium">In my v=
iew, nonfree licenses are ok for works of art/entertainment, or that presen=
t personal viewpoints (such as this article itself). Those works aren't=
meant for doing a practical job, so the argument about the users' cont=
rol does not apply. Thus, I do not object if they are published with the CC=
-BY-NC-ND license, which allows only noncommercial redistribution of exact =
copies.</p>
<p style=3D"font-family:'Times New Roman';font-size:medium">Use of =
this license for a work does not mean that you can't possibly publish t=
hat work commercially or with modifications. The license doesn't give p=
ermission for that, but you could ask the copyright holder for permission, =
perhaps offering a quid pro quo, and you might get it. It isn't automat=
ic, but it isn't impossible.</p>
<p style=3D"font-family:'Times New Roman';font-size:medium"><i>Howe=
ver, two of the nonfree CC licenses lead to the creation of works that can&=
#39;t in practice be published commercially, because there is no feasible w=
ay to ask for permission. These are CC-BY-NC and CC-BY-NC-SA, the two CC li=
censes that permit modification but not commercial use.</i></p>
<p style=3D"font-family:'Times New Roman';font-size:medium"><i>The =
problem arises because, with the Internet, people can easily (and lawfully)=
pile one noncommercial modification on another. Over decades this will res=
ult in works with contributions from hundreds or even thousands of people.<=
/i></p>
<p style=3D"font-family:'Times New Roman';font-size:medium"><i>What=
happens if you would like to use one of those works commercially? How coul=
d you get permission? You'd have to ask all the substantial copyright h=
olders. Some of them might have contributed years before and be impossible =
to find. Some might have contributed decades before, and might well be dead=
, but their copyrights won't have died with them. You'd have to fin=
d and ask their heirs, supposing it is possible to identify those. In gener=
al, it will be impossible to clear copyright on the works that these licens=
es invite people to make.</i></p>
<p style=3D"font-family:'Times New Roman';font-size:medium"><i>This=
is a form of the well-known "orphan works" problem, except expon=
entially worse; when combining works that had many contributors, the result=
ing work can be orphaned many times over before it is born.</i></p>
<p style=3D"font-family:'Times New Roman';font-size:medium">To elim=
inate this problem would require a mechanism that involves asking _someone_=
for permission (otherwise the NC condition turns into a nullity), but does=
n't require asking _all the contributors_ for permission. It is easy to=
imagine such mechanisms; the hard part is to convince the community that o=
ne such mechanisms is fair and reach a consensus to accept it.</p>
<p style=3D"font-family:'Times New Roman';font-size:medium">I hope =
that can be done, but the CC-BY-NC and CC-BY-NC-SA licenses, as they are to=
day, should be avoided.</p><p style=3D"font-family:'Times New Roman'=
;;font-size:medium">
Unfortunately, one of them is used quite a lot. CC-BY-NC-SA, which allows n=
oncommercial publication of modified versions under the same license, has b=
ecome the fashion for online educational works. MIT's "Open Course=
ware" got it stared, and many other schools followed MIT down the wron=
g path. Whereas in software "open source" means "probably fr=
ee, but I don't dare talk about it so you'll have to check for your=
self," in many online education projects "open" means "=
nonfree for sure".</p>
<p style=3D"font-family:'Times New Roman';font-size:medium">Even if=
the problem with CC-BY-NC-SA and CC-BY-NC is fixed, they still won't b=
e the right way to release educational works meant for doing practical jobs=
. The users of these works, teachers and students, must have control over t=
he works, and that requires making them free. I urge Creative Commons to st=
ate that works meant for practical jobs, including educational resources an=
d reference works as well as software, should be released under free/libre =
licenses only.</p>
<p style=3D"font-family:'Times New Roman';font-size:medium"><i>Educ=
ators, and all those who wish to contribute to on-line educational works: p=
lease do not to let your work be made non-free. Offer your assistance and t=
ext to educational works that carry free/libre licenses, preferably copylef=
t licenses so that all versions of the work must respect teachers' and =
students' freedom. Then invite educational activities to use and redist=
ribute these works on that freedom-respecting basis, if they will. Together=
we can make education a domain of freedom.</i></p>
<span class=3D"HOEnZb"><font color=3D"#888888">
</font></span></div></div><span class=3D"HOEnZb"><font color=3D"#888888"><d=
iv><br></div>-- <br>Everton Zanella Alvarenga (also Tom)<br>Open Knowledge =
Foundation Brasil<br>
</font></span></div>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear=3D"all"><div><br></div>-- <br>Everton Zane=
lla Alvarenga (also Tom)<br>Open Knowledge Foundation Brasil<br>
</div>
--e89a8f923da210b7b604cf794857--
More information about the okfn-discuss
mailing list