H817 /Open Learn Week 3 Activity 9 Choosing a Licensse
Wednesday, 10 Apr 2013, 10:41
Visible to anyone in the world
Edited by Deirdre Robson, Saturday, 13 Apr 2013, 11:41
The Open University (OpenLearn, 2013) uses a Creative Commons licence - this involves Attribution , Non-commercial usage, and Share Alike . The use of the NC facility would seem to be the aim to set a licence which enables "a degree of protection against unauthorised commercial exploitation or resources that we intended to deliver freely to the global educational community", also such NC licenses were those being used by most other educational institutions providing OpenCourseWare and Open Educational Resources internationally. This would seem to be in answer to the queries: 'Allow commercial usage'? Allow modificiations'? As a 'learning object' (open source educational course) OpenLearn would want its materials to be attributed, to be used in an 'open source' manner, and not made use of by other potential course providers in a way which goes against the open source intentions. The intention to provide a 'learning object' would seem to be a strong argument for the choices made within the wider ambit of a Creative Commons license. Within the terms of a blog entry, however, there are not perhaps quite the same considerations for a NC choice. What would surely be important are 'attribution' (one would want one's ideas to be known as coming from a particular source) even as the work is re-posted. The notion of 'no derivative works' would seem to be sensible if a posting is an integrated or indivisible unit e.g. photography but would seem to be less vital if the post is purely text. The share-and-share alike provision would seem to be important. If a work is posted under such terms, and thus provides an advantage to any re-user, the re-user should allow the same advantages to others.
H817 /Open Learn Week 3 Activity 9 Choosing a Licensse
The Open University (OpenLearn, 2013) uses a Creative Commons licence - this involves Attribution , Non-commercial usage, and Share Alike . The use of the NC facility would seem to be the aim to set a licence which enables "a degree of protection against unauthorised commercial exploitation or resources that we intended to deliver freely to the global educational community", also such NC licenses were those being used by most other educational institutions providing OpenCourseWare and Open Educational Resources internationally. This would seem to be in answer to the queries: 'Allow commercial usage'? Allow modificiations'? As a 'learning object' (open source educational course) OpenLearn would want its materials to be attributed, to be used in an 'open source' manner, and not made use of by other potential course providers in a way which goes against the open source intentions. The intention to provide a 'learning object' would seem to be a strong argument for the choices made within the wider ambit of a Creative Commons license. Within the terms of a blog entry, however, there are not perhaps quite the same considerations for a NC choice. What would surely be important are 'attribution' (one would want one's ideas to be known as coming from a particular source) even as the work is re-posted. The notion of 'no derivative works' would seem to be sensible if a posting is an integrated or indivisible unit e.g. photography but would seem to be less vital if the post is purely text. The share-and-share alike provision would seem to be important. If a work is posted under such terms, and thus provides an advantage to any re-user, the re-user should allow the same advantages to others.