development of an education license or license option for Creative Commons

[David Palmer <davidpalmer AT westnet.com.au>]

On Thu, 2003-10-23 at 08:37, David Wiley wrote:
> So I want to check a few things.
> 
> 1. Are members of this list interested in seeing more educational content
> released under cc licenses?

Yes, I see this cc strategy as necessary. I personally tend more to
Georges' thought mode - completely open, but ccs' niche lies in a
psychological aspect. Creators, sadly, have been conditioned into
retaining ideas, rather than sharing them openly. This makes the
possessor of the concept financially richer, while depriving the greater
community of the broader definition of wealth. 

Who was it said something about ' if I have an apple, and an
acquaintance has an apple, and we exchange apples, we both still have an
apple. But if I have an idea, and he has an idea, if we exchange ideas,
we each have two ideas'. 

The DMCA and the RIAA amongst other devolutionary steps stemming from
the Sonny Bono act, are running rife in their efforts to strangle open
creative exchange. The more broadly concepts such as cc can be
implemented, the better. It provides a more acceptable (to many)
opportunity to retain ownership of material, while still making that
material increasingly public domain accessible.
 
> 
> 2. Do members of this list think that in order to get more educational
> content licensed by a cc license we need more educators to understand the
> cc message  and how it relates to education?

Promotion is required. Any product that answers a market requirement
will gain market acceptance over time, but owing to points previously
made, time is running short. I don't think the question is whether
promotion of the concept is required or not, I think it is more a matter
of how the market is approached, how the product is presented to
maximise market acceptance.

> 
> 3. Do members of this list think that someone has to purposefully
> intervene in order to efficiently and effectively help a significant
> number of educators understand the cc message and how it relates to
> education?

I don't fully comprehend what 'purposefully intervene' entails. As
previously stated, I believe that selective promotion is necessary.

> 
> 4. Do members of this list think that a branding of a cc license
> configuration as an "Education License" and an awareness campaign are a
> good way to bring about this understanding, and hence, more cc-licensed
> educational materials?

Yes, a specific licence style is good. It provides the identification
factor with the target market, and the product acceptance that comes
with that.

Apparently, a major factor in the initial implementation of MITs' open
learning programme lay in overcoming the negative perception in the view
of the lecturers of giving up possession of treasured lecture notes and
formats. This is why the compromise was reached whereby only dated
material was released into the programme. By approaching organizations
such as this, once the 'education licence' was matured as a concept, and
providing a means of retention of ownership, and yet facilitating the
release of more recent material, represents the sort of selective
marketing approach I have previously mentioned.
> 
> If no to any of these, where is the flaw and what would you change?
> 
> D

Regards,

David.

Debian. Established example.