Talk:Barcelona Charter for Innovation Creativity and Access to Knowledge - Libre Interpretation
|Thread title||Replies||Last modified|
|Other Versions||0||15:01, 31 January 2010|
|Edu/a2k: support for teachers: case for free software weak (rms via Simona on fcforum)||1||13:43, 5 January 2010|
|Purpose||2||12:44, 14 December 2009|
|What changes were made to derive this libre/sustainability interpretation? and Discussing new Changes||0||03:30, 13 December 2009|
|Translations||0||02:51, 13 December 2009|
|The three main sections||0||16:11, 7 December 2009|
|Do we need a Conclusion ?||0||16:01, 7 December 2009|
Edu/a2k: support for teachers: case for free software weak (rms via Simona on fcforum)
Teaching and use of non-free software in publicly supported schools should be disallowed.
Libre interpretation amended as follows:
- Rename the section to Software, Standards and Policy
- Added "(as a matter of policy)" in the text of that section.
The statement is now stronger (as a matter of policy) without coming across as placing restrictions on educational institutions (an objection to rms's suggestion raised by one participant).
What is the purpose of the document? What does it hope to achieve and who is the primary audience? Perhaps this will help us think about innovative ways we can package the document to facilitate change and transformation? (question from Wayne 2009/12/7)
The "target audience" for the original charter is policy makers and decision makers concerned with copyright and patents - "demanding" policy changes and changes in the legal system.
The libre interpretation on WikiEducator is intended to educate citizens in a position to influence policy at various levels (that should be everyone who is capable of reading and understanding the document :-) about free culture, libre knowledge, interconnectedness, interdependence and sustainability, and inspire informed collaborative action.
Two potential "repackagings" are suggested below under "The three main sections".
On the FCForum wiki are links to some other possible versions for specific audiences (including educators and people concerned with a2k, economists, politicians, lawyers, etc. - under "Work groups final documents").
Is this a draft for a replacement? (rms by e-mail)
- It is not an official draft. It represents recommendations for improvements which hopefully will be considered by the editors of the Charter.
This version has been referred to as the "libre interpretation" or the "libre/sustainability version" - What does that mean? (rms by e-mail).
- "libre" and "sustainability" are more like keywords indicating the flavour of this version:
- A version which (1) uses the word "libre" and (2) orientates the Charter towards citizens' freedom to interact and participate in cultural and knowledge production and cooperate towards a sustainable world. The label "sustainability" indicates concern for long-term human wellbeing (social and economic) which depends on the wellbeing of the natural world. Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustainability
- This version aligns the Charter with the vision and principles expressed in the Libre Communities Manifesto - http://www.libre.org/communities/about/manifesto - specifically the last point ("the opportunity this freedom offers for networked communities to make a difference collectively, towards a sustainable world") and with the "Say Libre" essay: http://www.libre.org/communities/philosophy/saylibre
What would be a better "version reference"?
What changes were made to derive this libre/sustainability interpretation? and Discussing new Changes
Many. I started with the 18:15, 26 November 2009 version of the long version and made changes which varied from correcting typos and minor (though significant) wording to rewriting paragraphs and glossary entries. The changes align the charter with Say libre and Declaration on libre knowledge. This version is more visionary and less confrontational. In order to see the actual changes, I set up a "differences" page (go through its history from the bottom up).
Some changes (possibly) worthy of discussion:
- The word "democracy" is used sparingly - replaced by references to freedom and equality.
- The word "libre" is used to disambiguate "free" and instead of "open" when we mean open in the sense of "libre".
- Slight compromise with "open standards" - prefer to say "libre standards" but did not have time to do a thorough check on which required standards are open but non-free.
Re: Discussing new Changes from now on: See also the issue tracker.