Ha! Great minds, Julian, our messages crossed in the ether.
-----Original Message-----
From: Open Educational Resources [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Julian Tenney
Sent: 26 September 2012 09:55
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: SPARC "how open is it"
Would training count as education?
It's a can of worms. I think you're either open (do what the heck you like, and if you make a million, good luck to you) or you're not.
-----Original Message-----
From: Open Educational Resources [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Pat Lockley
Sent: 26 September 2012 09:53
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: SPARC "how open is it"
i still find it very curious that creative commons haven't made an "educational" version of NC
it would seem that'd solve a tonne of problems
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 9:49 AM, Julian Tenney <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I dispute CC-NC near the top of the openness scale, because it isn't
> clear what 'non-commercial' actually means. Frustrating recent
> experience trying to pass on some CC-NC stuff, discussions with the
> provider, and a failure to reach any sort of clarity back this up.
>
>
>
> From: Open Educational Resources [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> On Behalf Of Scott Wilson
> Sent: 26 September 2012 09:39
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: SPARC "how open is it"
>
>
>
> OSS Watch in partnership with Pia Waugh developed an "Openness Rating"
> for software projects including sets of questions feeding into broad
> dimensions (legal, standards, knowledge, governance, market).
> Something similar for OER materials and collections may be useful; I
> think the dimensions suggested for OA are perhaps a bit too focussed on just the licensing aspects.
>
>
>
> On 26 Sep 2012, at 09:23, Amber THOMAS wrote:
>
>
>
> Hallo
>
>
>
> Our friends in Open Access world are prising open the can of worms
> around the dimensions of openness.
>
> I wonder if any of this terminology carries over to our OER space -
> certainly reuse rights, copyrights and machine readability.
>
>
>
> Though we don't have the journals issue I think we have remix
> platforms that are going to become a battle line on our questions of
> reuse and attribution ... think pinterest XXL. And of course, MOOCs
> and other high profile online courses.
>
>
>
> I think research papers have norms of use well understood within
> academic circles. But treating papers as open content might surface
> some very challenging issues of what is acceptable use of an article.
> This isn't just about Creative Commons, it's about the promise of
> academic work previously locked in journals finally meeting the public. It could get interesting!
>
>
>
>
>
> Amber
>
>
>
> From: Repositories discussion list
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> On Behalf Of Amber THOMAS
> Sent: 26 September 2012 09:16
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: SPARC "how open is it"
>
>
>
> Hi
>
>
>
> I may have missed discussion on this list around this draft SPARC
> document on "OA: how open is it?"
>
> http://www.arl.org/sparc/media/HowOpenIsIt.shtml
>
>
>
> They are seeking feedback by 8th October.
>
>
>
> It suggests a spectrum of openness along these dimensions:
>
> Reader Rights
>
> Reuse Rights
>
> Copyrights
>
> Author Posting Rights
>
> Automatic Posting
>
> Machine Readability
>
>
>
>
>
> Looks useful to me: good to have some ways of describing these dimensions.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Amber
>
>
>
>
>
> Amber Thomas
>
> Programme Manager: digital infrastructure, learning materials, IPR
>
> Innovation Group
>
> Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC)
>
> email: [log in to unmask]
>
> twitter: @ambrouk
>
> mobile: cell+44 (0) 7920 534 933
>
> website: www.jisc.ac.uk
>
> team blog: http://infteam.jiscinvolve.org/wp/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> OSS Watch - supporting open source in education and research
>
> http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk
>
>
> [log in to unmask]
> [log in to unmask]
> http://scottbw.wordpress.com
>
> @scottbw
>
>
>
>
> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
> and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
> message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete
> it. Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in
> this message or in any attachment. Any views or opinions expressed by
> the author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the University of Nottingham.
>
> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
> attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your computer system:
> you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications with
> the University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK legislation.
|