Will I sign the declaration?

Jump to: navigation, search

This is a tough question which in my personal case as a active member of the free knowledge community could be likened to an moral dilemma. There is a fine line between doing things right and doing the right thing.

From the perspective of "education as a common good" -- I feel that it's important for us to support the intent of free content as a social good for education.

As a active member of the free knowledge community I do not support the closed way the declaration was developed. I'm also concerned that the declaration does not adequately address the distinctions between free and non-free OERs.

RMS in in many of his speeches offers advice when faced with an ethical dilemma like this. Namely what do you do should a friend ask for an unauthorised copy of non-free software?

  • Do you help your friend? or
  • Do you uphold the copyright requirements and refuse to give your friend a copy of the software?

RMS suggests that you should accept the lessor of two evils and give your friend an unauthorised copy of the software.

With regards to the Cape Town declaration, in many respects, I think that its better to accept the lesser of two evils. That is to support the intent of what they are trying to do.

So I have signed the declaration as a launch signatory -- but feel more like I'm doing things right than doing the right thing.

Mackiwg (talk)08:04, 14 December 2007

Personally I would rather wait and see how the document is amended after the various comments have been processed and assimilated.

There has been some talk about inclusivity.

A point to ponder:

"inclusivity of the Open Education community" vs "inclusivity".

Use of the term "libre" aligns with the latter. Use of the term "open" and much of the associated "baggage" (e.g. CC-BY-NC- etc.) (and the wording in the declaration and the process its development followed) is aligned with the former.

Nevertheless, the work being done by all the "open" communities is important and admirable. Hopefully it all leads towards the same thing - but I am not so sure yet.

("the latter" above implies: "inclusivity" of _everyone_ in the global knowledge society.)

Ktucker (talk)21:46, 14 December 2007

Kim that's a fair position and more than reasonable to wait and see whether proposed amendments will be incorporated into the document .

PS -- thanks to your postings on the net on the topic -- the debate has now opened up.

Mackiwg (talk)05:50, 15 December 2007

I would have to take this to my board... but there is a lot in line with the work we are doing at the openfireacademy.org and thefirewiki.org. I could see us aligning very easily with something like this. In short, we could support it.--Mike 22:04, 17 December 2007 (CET)

Mfinney (talk)10:04, 18 December 2007