Comments on: Commonwealth of Learning on Open Licenses – My comments http://sharing-nicely.net/2007/10/commonwealth-of-learning-on-open-licenses-my-comments/ Philipp Schmidt's shared learnings Thu, 26 Jan 2012 19:16:13 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Steve Foerster http://sharing-nicely.net/2007/10/commonwealth-of-learning-on-open-licenses-my-comments/#comment-15 Steve Foerster Fri, 02 Nov 2007 22:01:29 +0000 http://bokaap.net/ipr/commonwealth-of-learning-on-open-licenses-my-comments/#comment-15 I read it too, and while I also laud the Commonwealth of Learning for increasing awareness, I took exception to much of what the authors said about the history of open licenses for software and the attitudes of the community that developed them. More to the point, however, I didn't understand why half the chapter was devoted to software licenses when the book is meant for authors, educators, and librarians. I'd think it would make more sense to have a brief reference to the free software movement as the origin of the concept, then quickly move on to focus on licenses for content, which would surely be far more pertinent to the target audience. Also, a public domain dedication is *not* a license! It's legally very different. Sorry, but as a public domain enthusiast, this is a pet peeve of mine. On a positive note, one thing that I thought was excellent was the mention of notification and alternative dispute resolution as concepts inexplicably missing from current licensing schemes. This is a great point, and I'd prefer to see the authors expand on this greatly during the main section of the chapter rather than include it as an afterthought in its conclusion. I read it too, and while I also laud the Commonwealth of Learning for increasing awareness, I took exception to much of what the authors said about the history of open licenses for software and the attitudes of the community that developed them.

More to the point, however, I didn’t understand why half the chapter was devoted to software licenses when the book is meant for authors, educators, and librarians. I’d think it would make more sense to have a brief reference to the free software movement as the origin of the concept, then quickly move on to focus on licenses for content, which would surely be far more pertinent to the target audience.

Also, a public domain dedication is *not* a license! It’s legally very different. Sorry, but as a public domain enthusiast, this is a pet peeve of mine.

On a positive note, one thing that I thought was excellent was the mention of notification and alternative dispute resolution as concepts inexplicably missing from current licensing schemes. This is a great point, and I’d prefer to see the authors expand on this greatly during the main section of the chapter rather than include it as an afterthought in its conclusion.

]]>