[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [Osdc-edu-authors] flexbook

On 01/17/2011 10:49 AM, Karsten Wade wrote:
On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 12:19:18PM -0500, Mike Shumake wrote:
The flexbooks are still flat and
lacking engaging media though.  Also, the flexbook ck12 library isn't nearly
comprehensive enough to be a one-stop solution for NC's e-text
In addition, they are not really free and open content because they
are under the CC NC (non-commercial use) license.


I think it's fine for us to write articles about such non-free content
for opensource.com in talking about the landscape, but we should make
it clear in the article what the concerns and situation are with the
NC license. We need to be _very_careful_ not to equate this type of
content directly with open source because it has a field-of-use
restriction that makes it not open source!

It's so funny that this came up. A week or two ago, I downloaded all of the available CK12 books from Amazon onto my Kindle. I was reading the earth science one last night.

I'm not opposed to talking about them, and I agree that it's an opportunity to point out that they could be more open. It's also an opportunity to get in touch with someone there and do an interview--ask why they chose the NC license. It seems obvious, but they may have an answer and be willing to discuss it more. There's always the chance that somebody just went, "That one," without thinking about it much.

A few people have disagreed with me (in at least one case, vehemently) on this perspective, but I think opensource.com should promote even those who are making steps towards openness or are working openly in only portions of their operations. I believe in encouraging that openness by praising it, while pointing where they could improve, as I think it's better to shine a light on the good rather than do nothing but criticize the bad.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]