> Do
you not want to distinguish between MOOC platforms for which access is
charged and MOOC platforms for which access is free?
But then again, no MOOC platform charges
for access to content; content is free even in Coursera and the charge
is an optional add-on as part of the certification/accreditation...
Timos
From:
Andy Powell <[log in to unmask]>
To:
[log in to unmask]
Date:
24/07/2013 10:53
Subject:
Re: Use of CC
NC licences within UK F/HE - can we reach consensus?
Sent by:
Open Educational
Resources <[log in to unmask]>
> universities should not reuse third
party materials with the CC NC clause in the courses they put on MOOC platforms
Do you not want to distinguish between MOOC
platforms for which access is charged and MOOC platforms for which access
is free?
Andy Powell
Head of Product Research
Eduserv
[log in to unmask]
| 01225 474 319 | 07989 476 710
www.eduserv.org.uk
| @andypowe11
| blog.eduserv.org.uk
| LinkedIn
Eduserv is a company limited
by guarantee (registered in England & Wales, company number: 3763109)
and a charity (charity number 1079456), whose registered office is at Royal
Mead, Railway Place, Bath, BA1 1SR.
From: Open Educational Resources
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Thomas, Amber
Sent: 24 July 2013 10:19
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Use of CC NC licences within UK F/HE - can we reach consensus?
Thanks all
My view on the table then:
universities should not
reuse third party materials with the CC NC clause in the courses they
put on MOOC platforms.
This is only an edge case,
but I think it’s an important one in the ecosystem of open licenced materials
in open courses.
The risk of being challenged
is very low, so my advice to my own colleagues is not because I’m
risk averse.
If we don’t distinguish
between the CC clauses in our advice to people, the clauses turn to mush.
That’s my view. I reserve
the right to change my mind, but that’s how things look to me.
Additional question coming
up to do with a different clause, actually!
From: Open Educational Resources
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of B.Attwell
Sent: 24 July 2013 09:47
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Use of CC NC licences within UK F/HE - can we reach consensus?
I agree whole heartedly with
Jason and I think those that ‘rely’ on clarity all of the time
are not the people who should be charged with making decisions on taking
their businesses (whatever they are) forward. There is no such thing
as zero risk and those that seek it or rely on it hold up progress. Informed
decisions fine, deciding on an acceptable level of risk fine; requiring
100% clarity before making a decision? – no such thing.
Cheers Bernie
From: Jason Miles-Campbell [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 24 July 2013 09:33
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Use of CC NC licences within UK F/HE - can we reach consensus?
“Clarity
would be good.”
Clarity is one of my favourite things.
Along with whisky, and Girls Aloud. However, it needs to be
clear that decisions as to interpretation will also depend on appetite
for risk. Long live those who push the boundaries, and may they sometimes
reap rewards by doing so. For others, the safe path is preferred.
Users deciding on NC limits need to be able to make informed choices
as to risk, and I think that’s going to be as big an issue as finding
areas of ‘certainty’.
Cheers,
Jason
From: Open Educational Resources
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Thomas, Amber
Sent: 24 July 2013 09:26
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Use of CC NC licences within UK F/HE - can we reach consensus?
Hi All
The thing I'd welcome clarification on
is how the provision of free content can be part of a business model, I
think this relates to Tony's point.
The MOOC scenario could be the opposite
of the Oxfam scenario ...
Oxfam has a profit making subfunction that
subsidises the meta charitable aims.
What if a MOOC platform provider has a
free subfunction that enables the meta profit-making aims?
I'm not asking whether the MOOC provider
is ethical/good/right or not. I’m asking whether in good faith, the university
can use third party content licenced as CC NC under that scenario?
I think not. Clarity would be good.
If the free course = subfunction of a profit-making
objective, then the options for CC licenced content in MOOCs reduce.
That might be fine and sensible.
But as others have said on this thread,
understanding OERs in relation to MOOCs is important in terms of the ethos
of our decisions. The distinction matters to folk like us, even if not
to the big scheme of things.
In particular, I'm still not sure I understand
the pay-with-your-data aspect of MOOCs. If MOOC platform providers are
building business models out of data, how does the NC clause work?
Amber
-----Original Message-----
From: Open Educational Resources [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Tony.Hirst
Sent: 23 July 2013 17:18
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Use of CC NC licences within UK F/HE - can we reach consensus?
Couldn't I set up a MOOC platform with
a non-profit company (MOOCPlat Ltd, eg as a not-for-profit company limited
by guarantee) and a commercial assessment company MOOCass Ltd, and
then offer OERs through MOOCplat in a non-discriminatory way for free-in-exchange-for-registration,
then commercially sell assessment related to the course through MOOCass?
Notwithstanding a lack of case law, I'm
sure the lawyers could figure out a CC license accommodating equivalent
of a double Irish with a Dutch sandwich?
________________________________________
Tony Hirst
Personal blog: blog.ouseful.info
Tel/SMS: +44 (0) 1908 652789
Lecturer in Telematics
Dept of Communication and Systems
The Open University
Milton Keynes, MK7 6AA, UK
________________________________________
From: Jason Miles-Campbell [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 5:13 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Use of CC NC licences within
UK F/HE - can we reach consensus?
Charitable status certainly doesn't guarantee
"non-commercial", however. For example, an organisation
might raise a surplus through commercial trade in order to fulfil charitable
purposes - Oxfam shops, perhaps?
Cheers,
Jason
Jason Miles-Campbell | Manager | Jisc Legal
| T 0141 548 2889 | E [log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Jisc Legal, a Jisc Advance service,
is hosted by the University of Strathclyde, a charitable body, registered
in Scotland, with registration number SC015263
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Open Educational Resources [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> On Behalf Of Lorna Campbell
> Sent: 23 July 2013 17:08
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Use of CC NC licences
within UK F/HE - can we reach consensus?
>
> Hi Tony,
>
> That's an interesting point regarding
universities charitable status. Is that not
> changing though?
>
> Cheers
> Lorna
>
> On 23 Jul 2013, at 16:54, T.Coughlan
wrote:
>
> Hi Nick,
> "We're still public sector of
course" - but as most UK universities are charities,
> isn't there an equal argument for
saying we're third sector?
>
> Charitable status and NC seem to me
to be happy bedfellows. We play by the
> rules of charitable status (more or
less), so why shouldn't NC be included as
> part of the package?
>
> Lorna - yes, it's a good idea to air
these issues!
>
> Tony
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sheppard, Nick [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: 23 July 2013 16:42
> To: [log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Use of CC NC licences
within UK F/HE - can we reach consensus?
>
> I think many folk in HE have a knee
jerk reaction to NC and become
> apoplectic at the thought of the grubby
commercial sector using our OER for
> commercial gain! (We're still public
sector of course :-!)
>
> I probably shared that view myself
not so long ago but would now argue for
> the lowest barrier licensing possible.
>
> I'm not sure I'm clever or politically
literate enough to think through the
> implications but I've have similarly
lively discussions on twitter around the
> neo-liberal agenda that has contributed
to normalising CC-BY for research
> such that it can be mandated by RCUK
(to much teeth gnashing of course.)
>
> Nick
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Open Educational Resources [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> On Behalf Of Lorna Campbell
> Sent: 23 July 2013 16:29
> To: [log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Use of CC NC licences within
UK F/HE - can we reach consensus?
>
> Hi there,
>
> Earlier today there was a short but
lively discussion on twitter about the pros,
> cons and ambiguities of using the
CC NC licence in academic contexts. I'm
> sure many of your will be aware of
the complex issues that this raises,
> particularly with regard to whether
or not education is regarded as a
> commercial activity. If anything,
these issues have become more pressing
> with the advent of commercial MOOC
providers such as FutureLearn. Trying
> to define "commercial" "non-commercial"
and even "education" in global
> terms is a difficult task if not impossible
task, however our twitter discussion
> this morning led David Kernohan to
ask if it might be possible to define what
> these terms mean within the context
of our own community, i.e. UK F/HE.
> So what do you think, is there any
mileage in trying to agree how and in what
> context the CC NC licence can be used
appropriately within UK Higher and
> Further Education? What are
the chances of us being able to reach a
> consensus? Would it be useful
just to air the issues? Let us know what you
> think!
>
> Cheers
> Lorna
>
> --
> Lorna M. Campbell
> CETIS Assistant Director
> Email:
> l<mailto:[log in to unmask]>[log in to unmask]>[log in to unmask]<mailto:orna.m.ca<mailto:[log in to unmask]:[log in to unmask]>
> [log in to unmask]:[log in to unmask]>[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]:[log in to unmask]>>
> Skype: lorna120768
>
>
> To view the terms under which this
email is distributed, please go to
> http://disclaimer.leedsmet.ac.uk/email.htm
> -- The Open University is incorporated
by Royal Charter (RC 000391), an
> exempt charity in England & Wales
and a charity registered in Scotland (SC
> 038302).
>
> --
> Lorna M. Campbell
> JISC CETIS Assistant Director
> University of Strathclyde
> Glasgow
> Email: [log in to unmask]:[log in to unmask]:[log in to unmask]>[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]:[log in to unmask]>>
> Phone: +44141 548 3072
> Skype: lorna120768
>
> The University of Strathclyde is a
charitable body, registered in Scotland,
> number SC015263.
-- The Open University is incorporated
by Royal Charter (RC 000391), an exempt charity in England & Wales
and a charity registered in Scotland (SC 038302).
