10 Years of Open Content
David Wiley, PhD
Brigham Young University
Instructional Psychology & Technology

History?

http://flickr.com/photos/scragz/91147636/

Personal history

http://www.marshall.edu/finance/avpadmin/BlockM.jpg

http://flickr.com/photos/jamoker/502625172/

http://adsoftheworld.com/media/print/ana_bookstore?size=_original

Free software

http://www.softpanorama.org/People/Stallman/Images/saintignucius.jpg

http://www.flickr.com/photos/95229107@N00/1817276189 http://www.flickr.com/photos/95229107@N00/2125865619 http://www.flickr.com/photos/49968232@N00/2549830623

“Freedom”

http://flickr.com/photos/henrikmoltke/2713574899/

Winter, 1998

http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/files/www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/nodes/2565/raymond007-5-2.jpg

“Goodbye, Free Software; Hello, Open Source”

http://www.digijet.net/img/opensource.gif

http://www-acerc.byu.edu/Figures/BYUMedallionSM1.jpg

Let’s do this for content

A GPL for content?

free? open?
education? culture?
content? materials?
stuff? works?

OpenContent Principles /
License (OP/L)

Principles in a license?

http://www.softpanorama.org/People/Stallman/Images/saintignucius.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ef/ImageNupedia.png

Little uptake in education

Education = Publishers

So, in 1999...

http://flickr.com/photos/x180/888971170/

Would you publish openly?

What do publishers want?

Protect from undercutting

What do authors want?

Recognition

Protect work’s integrity

Open Publication License

Allows what you’d expect

Requires attribution

Two options

Option A
To prohibit distribution of substantively modified
versions without the explicit permission of the author(s)

Option B
To prohibit any publication of this work or derivative
works in whole or in part in standard (paper) book form
for commercial purposes unless prior permission is
obtained from the copyright holder.

Much better uptake!

http://gimp-savvy.com/BOOK/grokking-the-gimp.gif

But there were problems

OP/L vs OPL

Calling both the “open
content license”

OPL options A and B

Who named these?!?

And how do I tell?

btw, I’m not a lawyer

How do we fix this?

We don’t have to!

http://flickr.com/photos/35034363287@N01/2236177028/

Dec 2002, CC licenses

1.0 licenses

Attribution election

Noncommercial election

No Derivatives election

Not one license w/ options

Multiple, named licenses

CC By
or
CC By-NC-ND

(Still a button problem)

2.0 licenses

Attribution mandatory

(Back to OPL structure)

Later fixed the buttons!

Skipping ahead... (GFDL)

Where are we today?

How much open content?

Over 75,000,000 photos (CC)

Over 7,000,000 articles (GFDL)

10,818 Albums, 6,186 Artists (CC)

430,000 audio recordings (CC)

8,000 Songs, 580 Albums, 250 Artists (CC)

417,000 Videos (CC)

125,871 Moving Images, 51,454 Live audio,
276,179 Audio recordings, 466,065 Texts (var)

And in education?

“Open Educational Resources” (2002)

4,000 university courses (CC)

500 university textbooks (var)

16,000 K-12 curriculum units (CC)

Over 1600 individuals and 160 organizations

Not bad for 10 years!

The next 10 years?

4 books in 25 university beta fall 08 (CCPlus)

Public, online, exclusively open curriculum
Approved 2008, Opens 2009

The disaggregation of
higher education

HE provides:
• Content
• Learning support
• Credentials

From nothing to here in
10 years...

Rate of disaggregation will
continue to increase

Next 10 years look very
exciting!

Where will you take OE?

Thank You
david.wiley@gmail.com
http://davidwiley.org/