Stephen, Rory and all
Thank you for this very enlightening conversation. I'm sure there are many
others, like myself, who have not got involved because of our lack of
knowledge, but have been following with great interest. So, whatever
conclusions are drawn, I would just like you to know that I've learnt a
lot from the exchange, and appreciate that it has taken place in this open
forum. I can't say I understand all the details yet, but as a participant
on one of my workshops once said at the end of the day, "I'm still
confused, but at a higher level." (Which is a good thing!)
Gabi
On 13/06/2013 16:29, "rory" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>Ok, Stepen no more arguing from me either even though you have not
>provided one real world example of the legal challenges, poisoning,
>flooding, book-storing or even salting of a CC-BY text as opposed to a
>CC-NC text.
>The facts: 1. CC-BY content can be put in a closed repository or classroom
> 2. CC-NC content can also be put in a closed repository or classrooom
>So the "closure" argument is not one against CC-BY.
>
>So the reason that someone would use the NC restriction is because
>they don't want anyone other than themselves to commercialize it. So who
>doesn't want others to commercialize their work? How about commercial
>companies that wish to release info but don't want other companies to
>profit from it. Some of these CC-NC restriction supporters, while
>pretending to be open can be guilty of legal challenges, poisoning,
>flooding, book-storing and salting CC-BY texts.
>The one thing they cannot do is stop others from using CC-BY content.
>
>I think you'll find that for pretty much every public domain work other
>than the few painstakingly gathered in Gutenberg the argument I offer
>stands up pretty well.
>
>Actually, if you don't want companies to use a work the CC-SA
>restriction would be quite a deterrent.
>
>Stephen says:
>"I think you'll find that for pretty much every public domain work other
>than the few painstakingly gathered in Gutenberg the argument I offer
>stands up pretty well."
>Actually this is an argument supporting commercialization. If a work is
>so unknown or so unwanted that no one is willing to copy it for
>Gutenberg or other open site, then practically, the only way it can see
>the light of day is if someone copies it to make a profit. This is the
>market working at its best. If the work is not available anywhere, it's
>gone. If it is only available in physical libraries only a few can
>benefit. If it becomes available online you can pay for it and if its
>valuable you can release it to the world. You have as much right to it
>as the publisher.
>
>I think you'll find that for pretty much every public domain work other
>than the few painstakingly gathered in Gutenberg the argument I offer
>stands up pretty well.
>
>It's been fun!
>All the best.
>Rory
>
>Rory McGreal
>UNESCO/COL Chair in OER
>Athabasca University
>
>On 2013-06-12 10:24 AM, Stephen Downes wrote:
>>
>> OK, that's it, I'm done. No more arguing from me on this. If you
>> continue to support the "everyone must support CC-by" position, I will
>> simply regard you as being against free and open access to learning
>> and learning resources, and working instead for people trying to
>> privatize the education system, puting your own narrow self-interest
>> ahead of wider social values (putting you in my mind on par with banks
>> and the oil industry).
>
>
>--
> This communication is intended for the use of the recipient to whom it
> is addressed, and may contain confidential, personal, and or
>privileged
> information. Please contact us immediately if you are not the intended
> recipient of this communication, and do not copy, distribute, or take
> action relying on it. Any communications received in error, or
> subsequent reply, should be deleted or destroyed.
>---
|