[A2k] Sao Paulo city adopts OER law
carolina.rossini at gmail.com
Tue Oct 4 11:55:15 PDT 2011
We have discussed all this with them, plus sent them a list of case studies
that CC has prepared on OER and now we are mapping the projects that would
be or not interoperable with the resources coming from the city.
In any case, I think we should commemorate this step towards openness, as
something historic, since Brazil has not adopted any legislation or
institutional mandate in areas such as OA....and has adopted just some
institutional mandates/preferences in regard to free software. We of course
need to make more progress on removing the NC clause over time, and indeed
this is our goal, but it's still worth celebrating this step.
Brazil has indeed a great "free culture" group of people and free software
people, but this is the first time legislation was actually enacted in this
area. Getting open licenses of any sort into implementation is complex. And,
actually, this is the first of its kind in the world...even if you compare
with what came out of Obama government (now under challenge) or out of
Washington State also in the USA.
We also have an OER bill that we assisted to draft that was introduced in
the House of Representatives in the Brazilian Congress last june and soon we
will have one coming out of Sao Paulo state.
I also want to recognize the great work of CC-Brazil chapter/leads who are
directly supporting this work in Sao Paulo city. We have been working with
the city for a long time and discussing new models for open textbooks and
other issues, but the support of CC Brazil was crucial.
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 1:39 AM, Kim Tucker <kctucker at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
> Maybe a step forward (from 'copyright all rights reserved') but
> disappointing that the NC clause is included. Brazil has been
> inspirational in the past wrt free culture and software libre. Freedom
> should be valued more than such "openness" (imo):
> e.g. freedom for anyone in society (incl. e.g. educators, learners,
> parents and even commercial training companies) to participate in
> translating, adapting, improving and sharing/distributing learning
> Yes, cc-by would have been better, though cc-by-sa (the 'pro-freedom
> license') better still (imo) as those wanting to make a living by
> sharing knowledge would also be required to share their improvements
> without restricting freedom.
> i.e. they too would be participants in the continuous improvement
> cycle of developing and sharing libre/open learning resources.
> We educate people to become effective participants in society (sharing
> knowledge is a good way to contribute).
> For more on the rationale behind libre learning resources (which
> include those licensed cc-by and cc-by-sa) see:
> PS You probably know this, but for the benefit of any newbies who may
> have just subscribed, a few notes:
> By including the NC clause, they will not be able to freely exchange
> and build on great learning resources on sites like Wikipedia,
> WikiEducator, Wikiversity, LeMill, ....
> With cc-by sites such as Connexions, they would be able to incorporate
> resources but not share the improvements back to Connexions (etc.).
> Defining 'non-commercial' use is problematical. See the opening and
> closing statements of 'opencontent' (pro) in this debate:
> cc-by-sa includes the same freedoms as cc-by except the freedom to
> restrict the freedom of others.
> The purpose of the NC clause is to enable authors to protect their
> monopoly on making money with the resources. This is useful for those
> making a living by developing learning resources who need to make
> returns on their investments in development time. (not applicable to
> Brazil's public sector).
> On 4 October 2011 00:06, Carolina Rossini <carolina.rossini at gmail.com>
> > Hi all!
> > Great news on OER-Brazil this week !
> > Here it is (in Portuguese), the Decree published by Sao Paulo city
> > http://rea.net.br/2011/10/03/decreto-sobre-rea-em-vigor-em-sao-paulo/
> > It says that all the educational resources bought by the city need to be
> > (CC-BY-NC-SA...) (we've recommended CC-BY, or max... CC-BY-NC, due to
> > limited interoperability of CC-BY-NC-SA.... but that was a political
> > decision)
> > It also regulates the administration contracts, saying they shall bring a
> > clause allowing all resources to be published under a open license.
> > And here the oficial press-release from the Secretary: (portuguese)
> > I will soon post more...there is more to come this week! :-)
> > Best,
> > Carol
> > --
> > *Carolina Rossini*
> > Coordinator: OER-Brazil/REA-Brasil
> > www.rea.net.br
> > + 1 6176979389
> > *carolina.rossini at gmail.com*
> > _______________________________________________
> > A2k mailing list
> > A2k at lists.keionline.org
> > http://lists.keionline.org/mailman/listinfo/a2k_lists.keionline.org
+ 1 6176979389
*carolina.rossini at gmail.com*
More information about the A2k