This document discusses the importance of having early conversations about licensing for collaborative projects. It provides examples from three projects where discussing licensing early helped address issues around intellectual property ownership and copyright. The key points are: - Discussing licensing early clarifies copyright ownership and conditions of use when collaborators leave a project. - Open licensing allows materials to be shared more openly while still protecting intellectual property through attribution. It avoids awkward later conversations about use and ownership. - The three example projects all accepted open licensing principles after discussions, though one chose a more restrictive license and one a more liberal license than originally proposed.

1. Have the licensing talk early to
maximize impact: Experiences
from three collaborative projects
Dominik Lukes
@TechCzech - Researchity.net

2. Attribution-ShareAlike

3. Questions /
comments
@TechCzech

4. Presentation on j.mp/licensing-talk

5. Three projects:
iLearnRW, Load2Learn, LDD Navigator

6. Alt title:
How I found out
I’m a licensing geek!

7. Typed up in a few hours

8. Why?

9. People have inflated
expectations of the value of
their IP

10. People are ignorant of
copyright law implications

11. Content everyone wants
shared cannot be reused
due to unclear copyright
ownership

12. Solution?

13. Have the licensing talk early!

14. Licensing talking
points

15. Value of IP

16. How are we leveraging the
value of our IP?

17. Who sees our IP and would
we benefit more if it was out
in the open being used by
people?

18. Do we have any IP locked
away in documents that
have not been used by
anyone but may have impact
if shared openly?

19. Lack of clarity in a
collaborative project

20. Who owns the copyright?
Are all people working on a
collaborative project under
the same contract with their
institution?

21. How about copyright
ownership under different
jurisdictions? May not
always be enforceable by
contract?

22. What are specific conditions
of use once all principals
involved in creation and
collaboration leave?

23. Reality of Open
Licensing

24. You still OWN copyright of
openly licensed materials!

25. Open licences can offer
more realistic protection of
your IP by securing
attribution.

26. Many materials in education
with permission to copy
already effectively BY NC
SA.

27. Open licences give explicit
permission and remove
incorrect assumptions about
ownership.

28. Open Licensing
avoids awkward
conversations…

29. “I thought we owned that.”
“We can only use this
internally because we’re not
sure if we own it.”
“We need to get a
permission from X who left 2
year ago before we can use
this.”

30. Open Licensing
business models

31. You can still sell openly
licensed materials
(printed versions, special
formats, content
subscriptions, …).

32. Openly Licensed materials
can be doing the work of
advertising other services.

33. Openly Licensed materials
can directly support a
charitable mission.

34. Other sources of funding /
crowdsourcing can be
available for the
development and
maintenance of openly
licensed content.

35. Recommendations

36. Content
CC BY or CC BY SA
Code
Modified BSD or (a)GPL

37. Results

38. All three projects where this
was proposed accepted the
idea in principle.

39. 1. Accepted with more
restrictive license (added
NC).
2. Accepted with more
liberal license (BY instead of
BY SA)
3. Accepted as proposed
(BY SA)

40. It takes more work to get
from agreement to actual
implementation, but…

41. Load2Learn.org.uk/training/cuecards

42. OER Videos on
YouTube.com/Load2Learn

43. iLearnRW will release code and content

44. bit.ly/cc-teachers

45. Image credits

46. Rainbow Bee-eater, food transfer by David and
Dorothy Jenkins CC BY NC SA
https://www.flickr.com/photos/78742710@N08/16174327408

47. Thank you
@TechCzech