Lee culture i-nternet

964 views

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
964
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
244
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
4
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Lee culture i-nternet

  1. 1. Nonprofit Organizations in theDigital Commons Environment Jyh-An Lee When Cultures Encounters Internet Dec. 15, 2010
  2. 2.  Introduction• Research Question• Methodology• Contribution to Scholarship• NPOs in the Commons Environment• NPO Theories• Associating NPOs with the Commons Environment• Conclusion
  3. 3. information economy
  4. 4. 2 economies
  5. 5. proprietary economy
  6. 6. financial gain
  7. 7. IP = exclusion
  8. 8. commons economy
  9. 9. permission free
  10. 10. social movements
  11. 11. free/open source softwaremovement
  12. 12. free/open source softwaremovementopen access movement
  13. 13. free/open source softwaremovementopen access movementopen educational resources(OER) movement
  14. 14. free/open source softwaremovementopen access movementopen educational resources(OER) movementfree culture movement
  15. 15. Three SectorsGovernmentBusinessNPO
  16. 16. proprietary commons economy economy research,government PTO, IP rules OSS proprietarybusiness Red Hat, IBM owners CC, FSF,NPOs BMI, ASCAP PLoS
  17. 17. proprietary commons economy economy research,government PTO, IP rules OSS proprietarybusiness Red Hat, IBM owners CC, FSF,NPOs BMI, ASCAP PLoS
  18. 18. proprietary commons economy economy research,government PTO, IP rules OSS proprietarybusiness Red Hat, IBM owners CC, FSF,NPOs BMI, ASCAP PLoS
  19. 19. proprietary commons economy economy research,government PTO, IP rules OSS proprietarybusiness Red Hat, IBM owners CC, FSF,NPOs BMI, ASCAP PLoS
  20. 20. proprietary commons economy economy research,government PTO, IP rules OSS proprietarybusiness Red Hat, IBM owners CC, FSF,NPOs BMI, ASCAP PLoS
  21. 21. proprietary commons economy economy research,government PTO, IP rules OSS proprietarybusiness Red Hat, IBM owners CC, FSF,NPOs BMI, ASCAP PLoS
  22. 22. What is NPO?non-distribution constraint“third sector” or “voluntarysector”
  23. 23. • Introduction Research Question• Methodology• Contribution to Scholarship• NPOs in the Commons Environment• NPO Theories• Associating NPOs with the Commons Environment• Conclusion
  24. 24. Environmental movement
  25. 25. Environmental movementCultural environmentalism
  26. 26. “The public domain should have itsGreenpeace, its Environmental Defense Fund,its Nature Conservancy, its EnvironmentallyConcerned Scientists.”
  27. 27. “The public domain should have itsGreenpeace, its Environmental Defense Fund,its Nature Conservancy, its EnvironmentallyConcerned Scientists.”
  28. 28. How NPOs crafted theintellectual-commons environment in the digital world?
  29. 29. What are the NPOs in thecommons environment?Why they matter?Can current NPO theories explainthis phenomenon?Why commons environment is anideal milieu for NPOs to flourish?
  30. 30. • Introduction• Research Question Methodology• Contribution to Scholarship• NPOs in the Commons Environment• NPO Theories• Associating NPOs with the Commons Environment• Conclusion
  31. 31. sourcesacademic literaturenewsNPO website26 in-depth interviews (from19 NPOs and 3 for-profits)
  32. 32. theoretical frameworkcommons theories
  33. 33. theoretical frameworkcommons theoriesNPO theories
  34. 34. theoretical frameworkcommons theoriesNPO theoriesother theories theory of collective action theory of the firm theory of altruism
  35. 35. • Introduction• Research Question• Methodology Contribution to Scholarship• NPOs in the Commons Environment• NPO Theories• Associating NPOs with the Commons Environment• Conclusion
  36. 36. filling the gap in mainstream IPscholarship
  37. 37. filling the gap in mainstream IPscholarshiptesting NPO theories in a new setting
  38. 38. filling the gap in mainstream IPscholarshiptesting NPO theories in a new settingnew lens to understand theintellectual-commons environment
  39. 39. • Introduction• Research Question• Methodology• Contribution to Scholarship NPOs in the Commons Environment• NPO Theories• Associating NPOs with the Commons Environment• Conclusion
  40. 40. <1> social norms and licensing terms
  41. 41. <2> organizational support for peer-production projects
  42. 42. F/OSS Foundations managing property rights transacting with other entities providing collective decision-making mechanism protecting individuals from liabilities
  43. 43. <3> legal support
  44. 44. <4> political advocacy
  45. 45. <5> information access & repositories
  46. 46. <6> public-interest grant- making
  47. 47. -
  48. 48. -
  49. 49. -
  50. 50. • Introduction• Research Question• Methodology• Contribution to Scholarship• NPOs in the Commons Environment NPO Theories• Associating NPOs with the Commons Environment• Conclusion
  51. 51. <1> contract failure theory
  52. 52. Henry Hansmann
  53. 53. Henry HansmannNPOs function as a trusted channelwhen donors of specific services orgoods and recipients have noconnections with each other.
  54. 54. contract failureDonors Recipients
  55. 55. contract failureDonors Recipients NPOs
  56. 56. applications
  57. 57. applications typical application: donation to commons community
  58. 58. applications typical application: donation to commons community new application: donors = contributors of intellectual resources
  59. 59. <1> access failure
  60. 60. <1> access failure
  61. 61. <1> access failure
  62. 62. <1> access failure publishing copyright
  63. 63. <1> access failure
  64. 64. <1> access failure
  65. 65. <1> access failure content $$$
  66. 66. <1> access failure In the past ten years  220%~752%
  67. 67. <1> access failure
  68. 68. <1> access failure
  69. 69. <2> collaborative failure
  70. 70. problem of collective action
  71. 71. <2> collaborative failure
  72. 72. <2> collaborative failure less likely to impair diverse interests
  73. 73. <2> collaborative failure less likely to impair diverse interests only in large projects  complexity / scale  enough resources
  74. 74. <3> licensing failure
  75. 75. <3> licensing failure potential users  potential copyright infringement concerns  high transaction costs
  76. 76. <3> licensing failure potential users  potential copyright infringement concerns  high transaction costs creators  high legal fees
  77. 77. theory implications (1) trust hypothesis / trust theory
  78. 78. theory implications (1) trust hypothesis / trust theory from the interviews  trust  credibility  independence  neutrality
  79. 79. theory implications (2) convention wisdom:  The Internet eliminates middlemen and organizations  F/OSS is a production process without organization
  80. 80. Richard A. Epstein“OSS is not sustainable because it has noformal governance mechanism.”
  81. 81. limit of contract failure theory assumption: consumers distrust for-profit hard to explain the existence of NPOs involved in promoting social norms, lobbying activities
  82. 82. <2> government and market failure theory
  83. 83. Burton A. WeisbrodNPOs, emerge to meet an unsatisfieddemand for public goods due to bothmarket failure and government failure.
  84. 84. government and market failure theory assumptions:  because government can only satisfy majority interest  for the minority interests that cannot be satisfied by the government and the market, people turn to NPOs for certain public goods.
  85. 85. applications current IP laws legislative process contract failure under-provision over-exclusion
  86. 86. theory implications (1) social experimentation  government: not allowed to conduct policy experiment
  87. 87. theory implications (1) social experimentation  government: not allowed to conduct policy experiment  NPO can help to fulfill the role of experimenter for future policymaking
  88. 88. theory implications (1) social experimentation  examples:  Hewlett Foundation  Creative Commons
  89. 89. theory implications (2) the neglected interests of individuals  Peter Frumkin: “ “[n]onprofit and voluntary action expresses a complex desire to defend the pursuit of private individual aspirations.”
  90. 90. theory implications (2) the neglected interests of individuals  the history of copyright laws
  91. 91. theory implications (2) the neglected interests of individuals  the history of copyright laws  NPOs in the commons environment  representing individual interest  emphasizing on individual values
  92. 92. limits of government and market failure theory government failure  Weisbrod: government satisfies majority interests but fails to responds to minority interests  commons NPO & IP scholars:  government is captured by the copyright industry and fails to protect the majority
  93. 93. limits of government and market failure theory Larry Lessig: “around 85 percent of the citizens is inappropriately ignored in the copyright legislation”
  94. 94. limits of government and market failure theory market failure  the role of proprietary companies
  95. 95. limits of government and market failure theory NPOs serve as vehicles for for-profits  to provide public goods  to access the voluntary contributions
  96. 96. • Introduction• Research Question• Methodology• Contribution to Scholarship• NPOs in the Commons Environment• NPO Theories Associating NPOs with the Commons Environment• Conclusion
  97. 97. <1> gift economy
  98. 98. <2> information community
  99. 99. <3> demand revelation
  100. 100. • Introduction• Research Question• Methodology• Contribution to Scholarship• NPOs in the Commons Environment• NPO Theories• Associating NPOs with the Commons Environment Conclusion
  101. 101.  NPOs provide indispensable social infrastructure for commons production current NPO theories help us to understand NPOs’ role in the commons environment, but these theories have their own limit compared to the nature of for-profits and government, the nature of NPOs is more consistent with commons-environment culture
  102. 102. Thank you!! 1/2Commons and Suggestions 2

×