From EduTechWiki - Reading time: 11 min
Advertisement

This is the only ad on EduTechWiki, because it's for a good cause - Daniel K. Schneider 08:07, 6 October 2009 (UTC).
“Open content, coined by analogy with "open source" describes any kind of creative work including articles, pictures, audio, and video that is published in a format that explicitly allows the copying of the information” (Wikipedia, retrieved 17:53, 10 July 2006 (MEST)).
According to Huckell (2008), Benkler (2006) argues that Individuals, working in non-market, social production have been the source for much of the innovation in what is taken for granted by most persons using the Internet and exploited by commercial firms. Huckell then argues that “To follow industrial models of ownership and control of copyright by employers at the expense of the employees' economic and moral rights may thwart or, at minimum, attenuate the utility of social production”.
There is a large variety of open contents, i.e. informal information such as blog posts or wiki pages, but also more formal publications including free academic textbooks and open access journals.
See also Open educational resources, Wikipedia, Open source
Only when terms expire, the work is released to the public domain (e.g. free to used). In most countries this is the case when:
Internationally, copyrights are enforced by the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, usually known as the Berne Convention, and which was first adopted in Berne, Switzerland in 1886. It requires its signatories to protect the copyright on works of authors from other signatory countries (known as members of the Berne Union) in the same way it protects the copyright of its own nationals. The Berne convention states a minimal protection of 50 years after the author's death, but each country is free to extend that. It also allows exceptions, i.e. members shall confine limitations and exceptions to exclusive rights to certain special cases which do not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the rights holder.
Authors can, of course, relax copyright.
Education does have somewhat different rules. For each type of use, there are differences between countries, even in Europe. For example, what can be legal in France is not legal in Germany and the other way round ...
One reason for these differences is that ministries pay for use of copyrighted materials in certain contexts, e.g. schools or universities.
In most countries, academics retain copyright ownership for produced papers and publications, unless they gave it way to the publisher of course. In other words, the university usually does not own individual "literary works" (publications and non published texts). Things are often different for patents, trademarks, etc.
Now, some universities recently became interested in selling online learning contents. E.g. the the Swiss virtual campus project did encourage authors and institutions in that direction. Since these materials have been produced with extra internal funding, it also follows that the institution might hold the copyright and a big share of the profit. This is clearly a breach from older practice and Daniel K. Schneider considers this to be a harmful trend for the non-commercial public university system. We don't know actually if any courses of this program finally were sold ...
The question of copyright is more tricky in commercial or non-profit self-financing on-line education (typically the US case). If the university holds the copyright over a production it can make rapid changes to course material, can still offer the course after a professor leaves), etc.
Generally speaking we agree with Huckel (2008) that “if individuals, acting as moral agents, choose courses of action to socially beneficial ends, and are, in fact, responsible for so much of innovation in information, knowledge and cultural expressions, as has been shown, then that should be encouraged not thwarted. Law and policy should place that potential for moral agency in individuals' hands. Given a choice between an institution seeking rent for owned IP and an individual who may also do so but more likely will contribute creatively to the social good, as has been shown, the choice is clear. This still leaves the individual free to sell, license or give away copyrightable expressions to others for socially beneficial ends by the use of a range of licenses available from, for example, Creative Commons.”
There seems to be a huge difference between US and European intellectual property systems. The moral right concept ("droit d'auteur") includes “the right of identification (right of paternity) and right of the author to the integrity of copyrightable expressions.” (Huckel, 2008). In other words, moral right includes both utility (i.e. copyright) and social (i.e. moral) rights.
An important issue is whether an institution that holds the copyright over a work is allowed to make any modifications.
There are several reasons for using open contents in education
Open content licenses can be defined according to several criteria and that can be combined, of course, e.g.
E.g. "Creative Commons" (today's most popular open contents licence) allows an author to define 11 combinations of "attribution", "non-commercial", "no derivative works" and "share alike".
In a more general context, according to Gideon Burton (retrieved 13:21, 16 July 2010 (UTC)), an open scholarly communications system would include all of:
In other words, open content, i.e. open access, is just one facet of a truly "open process".
There are two contrasting possibilities of financing:
(1) OER material writing is funded by institutions, e.g. ministries of education. I.e. authors would be paid for writing a specific textbook. Writing also could be part of a job description. OER material editing and diffusion are funded by institutions, e.g. ministries of education. I.e. copy editors and publishers would be paid Authors, editors and publishers could receive fixed sums or per item that is downloaded.
(2) OER materials are produced and distributed by a community (as part of their work) using a technical infrastructure maintained by communities. E.g. Wikibooks are a good example.
All sorts of mixed arrangements could be imagined. Typical examples are "grand" OER initiatives initiated by various institutions, e.g. BC Open Textbooks
Creative Commons defines the spectrum of possibilities between full copyright - all rights reserved - and the public domain - no rights reserved. Our licenses help you keep your copyright while inviting certain uses of your work - a "some rights reserved" copyright (Learn More about Creative Commons, retrieved 17:53, 10 July 2006 (MEST)).
The Creative Commons website enables copyright holders to grant some of their rights to the public while retaining others through a variety of licensing and contract schemes including dedication to the public domain or open content licensing terms. The intention is to avoid the problems current copyright laws create for the sharing of information. See Creative Commons home page or Wikipedia: Creative Commons for more details
According to the creative commons website (17:53, 10 July 2006 (MEST)), there are 11 majors versions of the creative commons license based on four conditions:
Creative Commons also launched initiatives for education, e.g. ccLearn and the Main_Page openEd community site.
(Wikipedia, retrieved 17:53, 10 July 2006 (MEST))
This licence has been created for the academic Open Content Project and has been reused in several other projects including artistic ones. Its creators now suggest using a variant of "creative commons".
Open contents can be published through any sort of medium, e.g. on paper, through traditional HTML pages based web site, with a CMS, or a with a system that allows online collaborative writing. Together with various open content intellectual property schemes, this opens many possibilities.
It is not obvious to find open educational resources. The Creative Commons ccLearn division sponsors a website and a specialized search engine:
Examples below include a small, incomplete mix of systems and copyright schemes.
A lot of academic content is open. Often, it is not very clear what copyright rules apply.
Wikis became popular because they allow a smaller or larger group of people to produce together linked contents. Also, contents keep their history and changes can be undone if needed.
Several organizations make digital libraries with contents available. E.g.
See also the Open educational resources (OER) movement article for more examples in the educational realm.
For software, read Journal management software
Since the 2010s, there are some fake publications according to Beall (2012).
There exist several organizations that provide and/or curate open textbooks.
In addition, many organizations, offer free online courses, e.g. Open University's open learn classes or the Saylor Academy. Some of these are based on a central textbook, others assemble various materials, including videos (e.g. MOOCs)
There exist several web sites that distribute articles and electronic books for free. Since that is a copyright violation, we will not publish these links here.
There exist legal strategies: