[Oer-community] On-line education is using a flawed Creative Commons license

[Brian Lamb]

I am finding this discussion on the NC clause to be provocative and fun to read.  I find points made on both sides worthy of consideration. I am confused by this point of comparison by Rory:

>> 
> RORY>>> Not true. NC does NOT prevent commercialization. It encourages it. Private companies want the exclusive right to distribute so they license it  directly from the author a la Flatworld.  NC promotes and supports commercialization. People in Canada have free access to water. Others bottle it and people pay for it. The fact that some companies choose to sell it does not make water unfree. Granny can bottle her free water and sell it. Others can take the free water and use it gratis.

> ...Water is free you can use if as you like or you can sell it. NC restricted content limits the selling option to one person.
> 

In most places I've been, water is a publicly regulated commodity. "Granny" either pays a water bill, or helps support a public utility through her taxes. She can bottle her free water and sell it, but if she were doing it on such a scale that it exceeded a reasonable personal usage, she would likely face legal sanction. In places where water is scarce, water rationing is common.  And I would hope corporations or individuals would not be permitted to engage in commercial activities that endanger the careful management of a limited and valuable resource - whether by polluting it, or by excessive use (or control) of it.

On another note, have y'all read this post by Mike Caulfield?

http://hapgood.us/2012/10/31/coursera-cc-nc-and-ocw/

Turns out the application of an NC license does not absolutely forbid all commercial use for all time. "A CC-NC license is not a blood oath; the license holder can negotiate exceptions."  Wow, who knew? But we would have to talk to each other. And this mailing list just demonstrates how much educators hate to talk to one another.

Finally, can somebody tell me if an NC license forbids reuse by non-profit public education institutions that charge tuition? Seems like a fairly simple question, but I've heard authoritative responses that wholly contradict each other on that point. If such basic definitions of use are this unclear, I suspect we will not find consensus on this discussion.

Though again, I am enjoying following the debate. Thanks to all the participants.

Brian

Brian Lamb
Director, Innovation
Thompson Rivers University 
Kamloops, BC, Canada
(On leave from UBC)





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://deimos.cs.athabascau.ca/mailman/private/oer-community/attachments/20121128/eeae5b33/attachment.html