Comments on: Copyleft and Fish in Water http://opencontent.org/blog/archives/349 pragmatism over zeal Tue, 07 Oct 2008 07:49:51 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2 By: Wide Open Education » Defending fair use http://opencontent.org/blog/archives/349#comment-35119 Wide Open Education » Defending fair use Fri, 03 Aug 2007 21:54:46 +0000 http://opencontent.org/blog/archives/349#comment-35119 [...] the debates about the incompatibility of open licenses rage on, it brings home to me again how they are really just a stop gap while the real battle is on [...] [...] the debates about the incompatibility of open licenses rage on, it brings home to me again how they are really just a stop gap while the real battle is on [...]

]]> By: Steve Foerster http://opencontent.org/blog/archives/349#comment-35050 Steve Foerster Fri, 27 Jul 2007 13:12:40 +0000 http://opencontent.org/blog/archives/349#comment-35050 This is a very good point, and I agree it's something that should be reworded. If material is in the public domain then it's available without restriction. If it's released under a Creative Commons license, however permissive, then it is not. This is a very good point, and I agree it’s something that should be reworded. If material is in the public domain then it’s available without restriction. If it’s released under a Creative Commons license, however permissive, then it is not.

]]> By: Philip Serracino Inglott http://opencontent.org/blog/archives/349#comment-35048 Philip Serracino Inglott Fri, 27 Jul 2007 08:34:50 +0000 http://opencontent.org/blog/archives/349#comment-35048 I think your article plays with syntax to re-discover an issue that the freedom culture is very well aware of and requires much deeper analysis of the Licence texts themselves (not to mention other explanations of the freedom culture's nascent philosophy) rather than the single sentence summaries of them. Please keep in mind that the prevalent copyright laws work to restrict all freedoms (except for those explicitly granted). The idea of copyleft is to turn this on this head and use those same laws to provide you with NO Restrictions (except those explicitly mentioned). So, taken in context, "the liberty to adapt, modify and use content without restrictions" implies that the restrictions required to allow for as much liberty as feasible in the current state-of-affairs are still imposed. By (weak) analogy: If you are in favour of freedom of expression you do not need to disagree with laws against slander. Actually such laws are useful in protecting the viability of freedom of expression. In other words, paradoxically, some restrictions are sometimes needed to protect, and promote freedom. I think your article plays with syntax to re-discover an issue that the freedom culture is very well aware of and requires much deeper analysis of the Licence texts themselves (not to mention other explanations of the freedom culture’s nascent philosophy) rather than the single sentence summaries of them. Please keep in mind that the prevalent copyright laws work to restrict all freedoms (except for those explicitly granted). The idea of copyleft is to turn this on this head and use those same laws to provide you with NO Restrictions (except those explicitly mentioned). So, taken in context, “the liberty to adapt, modify and use content without restrictions” implies that the restrictions required to allow for as much liberty as feasible in the current state-of-affairs are still imposed.

By (weak) analogy: If you are in favour of freedom of expression you do not need to disagree with laws against slander. Actually such laws are useful in protecting the viability of freedom of expression. In other words, paradoxically, some restrictions are sometimes needed to protect, and promote freedom.

]]> By: leighblackall http://opencontent.org/blog/archives/349#comment-35046 leighblackall Fri, 27 Jul 2007 07:46:42 +0000 http://opencontent.org/blog/archives/349#comment-35046 Umm, I'm not sure about Chris L's comment Dave, nor am I sure why and how you missed my attempts to articulate this very concern (I spoke about this the same day you spoke at George Siemens Future of Education conference.. anyway, if you haven't read through my attempt to paint this water the fish can't see, I hope you will now... <a href="http://wikieducator.org/User:Leighblackall/Open_educational_resources_and_practices" rel="nofollow">OERP</a> Umm, I’m not sure about Chris L’s comment Dave, nor am I sure why and how you missed my attempts to articulate this very concern (I spoke about this the same day you spoke at George Siemens Future of Education conference.. anyway, if you haven’t read through my attempt to paint this water the fish can’t see, I hope you will now… OERP

]]> By: Chris L http://opencontent.org/blog/archives/349#comment-35043 Chris L Thu, 26 Jul 2007 22:36:30 +0000 http://opencontent.org/blog/archives/349#comment-35043 It's a category and definition question. You are rolling the use of the content and the metadata that must be attached to it together, whereas others are not. You are indeed free to adapt, modify and use the content without restriction under the latter reading because there are no CONTENT restrictions. This is presumed to be common sense (wrongly, perhaps)-- or just ignored-- by those who use the license. It's arguable that a license for the content is part of the content itself. It’s a category and definition question. You are rolling the use of the content and the metadata that must be attached to it together, whereas others are not. You are indeed free to adapt, modify and use the content without restriction under the latter reading because there are no CONTENT restrictions. This is presumed to be common sense (wrongly, perhaps)– or just ignored– by those who use the license.

It’s arguable that a license for the content is part of the content itself.

]]>