eclectic, pragmatic, enthusiastic
No, this isn’t another tired post complaining that we should think of all “consumers” as also being “producers.” Of course we should.
This is a post about a much more subtle problem with the way we’re thinking, that I am increasingly convinced is putting the field of open educational resources (OER) at risk.
Every now and then I receive an inquiry about the status of the Open Publication License. Today I received this one:
I would like to know about your view on the “Open Publication License” today. I have had some arguments about its status. I have read in the past on some pages that is not recommended to be uses any more and rather one should use the Creative Commons licenses. The wikipedia also states that ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Publication_License). Maybe you can clarify that in a blog post with some comments on the status and how you see the OPL in relation to other licenses or what ia [sic] bad or good about it. So then I could link people to that post and not have to argue about that any more. That would be great.
So here is a whirlwind overview of Open Publication License, and where it stands today.
<grump mode=”on”> I’m feeling grumpy today. Must be the jet lag. Why do people think that open source licenses are a kind of magic pixie dust? Here’s a little thought…. Let’s call it Wiley’s Anti-openness Thought Experiment (WATE): A major publisher publishes a beginning algebra textbook which is not very effectively designed. Most faculty avoid … Read more