Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-education - Re: [cc-education] Quick draft

cc-education AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: development of an education license or license option for Creative Commons

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Heather Ford <hford AT csli.stanford.edu>
  • To: development of an education license or license option for Creative Commons <cc-education AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [cc-education] Quick draft
  • Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 10:35:32 -0800


I think David should be commended for crafting inclusive language with an "opt
out" feature for the hated institution clause. It's worth noting that the
default state is "open", and it takes a conscious decision to invoke the
institution restriction.

The decision on whether this matters, depends on what one thinks about the
likelihood that some content producers in higher ed might balk at this license
without an option for the institution clause. I can't say authoritatively, but
I expect that some would, so why not include the option? I recall Stephen's
counter-argument (please correct me if necessary) that providing this option
will cause licensors to choose the more restrictive license, even if they
wouldn't otherwise, simply because it's there -- especially if it's a readily
toggled radio button in the online licensing engine. I admit that that scenario
also seems fairly likely. Which then seems more attractive: a larger pool
comprised, in part, of more restricted content, or a smaller pool of open
content?

best,
Zach

I agree with Zach - but I think that an important point that we seem to be missing is that Creative Commons is about creating a *spectrum* of rights - we do give guidelines and choices, but we want to create *balance* in the present copyright system so that rights are distributed more fairly throughout society. If this means that we put the choice of whether educational use should be limited to formal institutions or not (depending, for example, on very different *national* educational contexts) then I think that we should give people that option - hoping that at least they will have to think about what education and learning really means and where it can take place. I really don't think we should abandon the license before testing it out and gauging responses from a wider audience - especially the learners, facilitators, educators, teachers, lecturers and students who will actually make use of the licenses.

In the end, I suppose it's more about *how much* we want to do - how much change is enough for us to introduce to a sector in which these ideas are not prevalent (as is the case in the software industry) in order for the licenses to be successful and popular. In the end, what Creative Commons is aiming for is for people from all disciplines to be presented with a variety of different *alternatives* to copyright that make them think about what 'intellectual property' is all about. For me, distributing this (really vibrant) discussion about what learning is really about to a wider public by actually implementing a license (which we can alter in the future or add to if the need arises) is much better than doing nothing.

Best,

Heather.


==================================
Zachary Chandler
Language Technology Consultant
Director, Language Resource Center
Colby College
Waterville, Maine 04901
http://www.colby.edu/lrc/
zechandl AT colby.edu
207.872.3898
_______________________________________________
cc-education mailing list
cc-education AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-education

Heather Ford
************************************************
www.hblog.org
Reuters Stanford Digital Visions Program
http://reuters.stanford.edu
Cordura Hall, 220 Panama Street
Stanford, CA 94305-4115, USA
Cell: 650 380 4227





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page