Nowerdays the battle of open versus closed is replaced with more complex debates, which are, unfortunately, a bit boring for many researchers. What does that mean for the spread of the science 2.0, the open and the citizen science movement?

1. The Bad News About the
Good News: Openness has
won
Christian Heise, Centre for Digital Cultures / Open Knowledge Foundation DE e.V.
Barcamp Science 2.0, Hamburg, 24.03.15
ZBW – Deutsche Zentralbibliothek für Wirtschaftswissenschaften

2. Do you remember?

3. About 25 years of free online access to science
and 25 years of the Gameboy = same Decade

4. What happened? 1991
1998
2000/2001
2001/2002
2003
2003
2013
2012

5. So, openness has „won“
– now what?

6. New Challenges

7. 1. There will be more complex
and nuanced debates

8. Challenges:
- CC-BY vs CC-BY-NC/ND; Gold vs Green Open Access
Policy vs other Policies; Self-hosted vs Third party
services …
- never lose sight of our objective
Possible Approaches:
- open up the debate
- discuss regularly on issues about openness
- open access commissioner in scientific institutions
- open access policies at universities

9. 2. There will be more
„Openwashing"

10. Challenges:
- „openwashing“, assimilation, imprisonment and
enclosure of research (e.g. #BlockReadcube)
- legal loopholes / „hybrid OA“ (e.g. offering authors CC-
BY-NC for a fee, while giving themselves commercial use
license)
Possible Approaches:
- constant public fight against „openwashing“ and legal
loopholes
- let us start the critique of openness
- start a recognized clearing institution (labeling)
- always refer to criteria of the open definition

11. 3. Openness is still pretty
inconvenient and no fun

12. Challenges:
- „open“ and collaborative scientific work is still not
convenient
- reducing the manual effort
- solve right issues and misunderstandings / urban
legends
Possible Approaches:
- awards / hackdays / whatever dissemination
- build more and better tools and showcases
- enable your colleagues

13. 4. No way (yet) in gaining (high)
reputation via open scientific work

14. Challenges:
- development and acceptance of alternative metrics
- open reputation without loss of idea diversity
Possible Approaches:
- publish good stuff via open channels
- convince your colleagues to publish openly
- conquer the consequences of openness

15. Challenges accepted?

16. Academics (we) have to decide now on:
A. to improve steady-state(just good news)
or
B. focus on a new scientific revolution? (good & bad news)

17. Sources/References:
A bevy of Japanese GameBoy carts (CC-BY-SA 2.0) by Bryan Ochalla
Taiko no Tatsujin DS manual page(s) (CC-BY-SA 2.0) by Bryan Ochalla
Our Collection (CC-BY-ND2.0) by wisekris
Guy with WII (CC-BY-ND 2.0) by Herman Yung
Ottawa Comiccon 2014: Game Boy (CC-BY-SA 2.0) by Pikawil
Gameboy Advance A-f-T-e-R-b-U-r-N-e-R (CC-BY 2.0) by Joey Mink
Nintendo Gameboy (CC-BY 2.0) by William Warby
Complete-in-box GameBoy (CC-BY-SA 2.0) by Bryan Ochalla
Further Links:
Open Knowledge Foundation Deutschland e.V.: http://www.okfn.de
Open Knowledge Definition: http://www.opendefinition.org
DE Open Science AG: http://okfn.de/open-science/
Ross Mounce - Show me the data!: http://rossmounce.co.uk/
Pawel Szczesny on „Science 2.0 - and now what?“: http://www.slideshare.net/freesci
Martin Weller on „Openness has won – now what?“: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk(...)openness-has-won-now-what/
Contact:
Twitter: @christianheise
Mail: christian.heise@okfn.de