Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

OpenContent Closes Its Doors

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the lotta-good-done dept.

meta4 writes "After five years of pioneering the application of open source principles to stuff other than software, OpenContent is closing down. Project Lead David Wiley provides a rationale for the closing on the website, as well as a brief overview of the projects' successes. Wiley has joined Creative Commons as Project Lead for Educational Licensing."

5 of 101 comments (clear)

  1. Re:I switched to CC also by kin_korn_karn · · Score: 0, Troll

    By nature, people want to share
    My god, the smell of bullshit is overpowering.

  2. One question: by TrollBridge · · Score: 0, Troll
    What the hell is "copyleft"??

    It almost sounds to me like those "Womyn's" groups who are offended by the presence of "men" in the proper spelling of the word.

    --
    There's a Mercedes gap too. I want one and can't afford one, but it's not government's job to do anything about it.
  3. Good reference, but 'copyleft' isn't more 'free' by TrollBridge · · Score: 0, Troll
    "Copyleft says that anyone who redistributes the software, with or without changes, must pass along the freedom to further copy and change it."

    That pretty much summed it up, until:

    "Proprietary software developers use copyright to take away the users' freedom; we use copyright to guarantee their freedom. That's why we reverse the name, changing 'copyright' into `copyleft.'"

    Honestly I believe this is a childish, not to mention inaccurate, portrayal of copyrights. Not that I'd expect anything less from RMS, but stating that the purpose of copyrights is to take away some perceived right of software users to modify and redistribute it simply isn't true. In fact, I'd say it's every bit as restrictive as copyright, in the fact that anyone using 'copylefted' software MUST redistribute any alterations publicly.

    I have no problem with the concept of 'copyleft'; in fact I think it's a great idea. But all it is is a different kind of lisense, like the GPL and LGPL. It has nothing to do with being more free than copyright.

    It just burns me up when a new concept in software is sold on its being more 'free', because in most cases, it's not.

    --
    There's a Mercedes gap too. I want one and can't afford one, but it's not government's job to do anything about it.
  4. Re:unfortunate by Cyno · · Score: 0, Troll

    Our vision will keep us strong.

    Now I'm curious. Which vision is that? The one where everything is free? Or the one where everyone is free to steal other people's work and profit from it?

  5. I believe this is for the best by FinalCut · · Score: 0, Troll

    I have known David for quite a while, dating back to 1996, and he is a pretty bright guy. I have faith in his judgement and figure if he thinks this is the best course of action toward reaching the goals he was eyeballing so long ago then it probably is the best path for him to take at the moment. I think his addition to the CreativeCommons team will be a great benifit to CreativeCommons and the Open[Anything] community.