Archive talk:Open University Campaign

From FreeCulture.org
Jump to: navigation, search

Extended Version

As Kevin noted on the discussion list, we could need an improved version for the public. Rob's email could build the foundation:

Email from Rob

Rob Myers <rob@r...org> Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 5:20 AM

To: Discussion of Free Culture in general and this organization in particular <discuss@f...org>

I think it's great that SFC are concentrating on Academic Freedom. But trying to squeeze the word "open" into every sentence for political reasons obfuscates this clear practical project.

The university does not restrict academic freedom and materially supports it. (1. the research the university produces is open access)

As part of not restricting academic freedom, and as part of materially supporting it, the university makes its course materials publicly available under non-discriminatory copyleft. (2. the course materials are open educational resources)

As part of not restricting academic freedom, and as part of materially supporting it, the university does not use or produce proprietary or illegal-monopoly-derived software or standards but instead uses and supports the development of free software and open standards. (3. the university embraces, extends and extinguishes free software and open standards)

As part of not restricting academic freedom, and as part of materially supporting it, if the university holds patents it publicly licenses them without fee or restriction except for common patent defense. (4. if the university holds patents, it readily licenses them for free software, essential medicines, and the public good)

(The last point covers licenses and patent pool schemes with retaliation clauses.)

As part of not restricting academic freedom, and as part of materially supporting it, the university network shall be free and unrestricted as was the historical internet. (5. the university network reflects the open nature of the internet)

- Rob.

Could the wording be affirmative (e.g. "not restricting" --> "promotes"/ "advocates"/ "enables"/ "materially supports"/ etc. academic freedom)?
Does it have to be "non-discriminatory copyleft" (or would CC-BY be acceptable?). Aside: interesting licensing idea: Libre Puro. K 21:37, 8 September 2009 (EDT)

Concerns

Animosity

The universities which will be ranked/graded in time will be the ones that have SFC chapters (for the vast majority). As such, will we be enemies of the universities? Will they be supportive of our goals if they are getting Cs, Ds and Fs? --This could be solved through bronze, silver and gold stars for each criteria... less adversarial.

Trademark Worry

Yes, it (and derivatives) are trademarked, but I think our designation/campaign might be legal because the specifications of the trademarks seem to be fairly limited to things besides a political campaign. Here's the Trademark Search(broken link). Or we could consider other branding: "Free Culture Accredited University" or something else.


Libre vs Free vs Open

Kctucker 19:18, 7 September 2009 (EDT)

In support of the comment above on the word "open":

It would be clearer to say "libre" to disambiguate "free" and emphasise freedom over "openness" which potentialy misses the point (say "Libre").

e.g.

  1. The university engages in libre research. (produces)
  2. Course materials are libre resources.
  3. The university embraces software libre and libre standards.
  4. If the university holds patents, it readily licenses them for software libre, essential medicines, and the public good. (Comment below)
  5. The university network reflects the libre (knowledge) nature of the internet.

The above will need to be refined and some of the terms more precisely defined as part of the process - in a spirit of visionary leadership towards inclusivity of the billions of people likely to become connected in the not too distant future.

In a nutshell, the above is about "libre knowledge" and suggests the "Libre University Campaign" (i.e. rename the campaign).

The one on patents (above) requires discussion - "readily licenses them for software libre" - does that not indirectly support software patents? This may have an impact downstream on countries which do not allow software patents (they are right) - e.g. via trade agreements involving copyrights and patents, etc. Consider dealing with software patents separately from other patents and clarify where these are appropriate.

PS: Is the Student Statement on The Right to Research part of this initiative?

Other

here a little german article markus wrote for netzpolitik.org: http://netzpolitik.org/2008/free-culture-conference-2008 --Raffa 11:35, 22 October 2008 (EDT)

Student Help

Student help for testing tool