This document discusses the concept of "Open All" or applying open principles across all areas of knowledge creation and sharing. It argues that while open access (OA) has been successful in some fields like research, fully implementing open standards in all areas will require moving from grassroots adoption to top-down public policies. The document also examines challenges like balancing open licensing with copyright and ensuring open models enable real reuse of content.

1. Alek Tarkowski
Centrum Cyfrowe Projekt: Polska
Creative Commons Poland
Open Access as an
element of an
"Open All" approach
- policies and practices.

2. Open …. ?
• OA has developed multiple
standards, tools, models that can be
reused in other sectors

3. „Open All”
• Not necessarily applicable to
every bit of content
• Di"erent from Wikipedia’s access
to all knowledge
• Rather creation of norms for all
types of content / all #elds of
creativity / knowledge creation
(to which exceptions can exist)

4. „Open All”
• Open = Access to Content + User
Rights
• Everyone has a particular point of
entry / point of reference
• Access vs. (Re)use – the latter
more problematic

5. „Open All”
• Free / Open Software
• Open Access … and Open Science
• Open education (HE, K-12,
preschool)
• Open data: Public Sector Information,
Public Data
• Open GLAM: heritage, cultural sector
content

6. „Open All”
• An ongoing, gradual extension of the
open model / philosophy to all
spheres of activity.
• What is the key area of activity?
• Is „open convergence” possible,
towards a single standard of open?
• What are key areas of activity?
• What are strategic areas of activity?

7. From grassroots activity
to top-down policies
• „Open anything” begins with grassroots
activity and develops into a policy debate
over time
• Open data / PSI an obvious outlier

8. From grassroots activity
to top-down policies
• Policies provide strong leverage for
implementation of open standards
• Public character (funding) of content a
strong argument for openness: the
commons / public infrastructure
• Policies lack the element of personal,
voluntary decision – but are an expression
of a consensus as to the „management”
of common resources

9. point of reference: OA
• Advantages:
• Mature content production and distribution
model (also from an economic perspective)
• 20+ years of experience w/ implementation
• Precise goals / tools / theory of change –
„modest” in a good sense (vs. open science)
• Clear institutional policy model
• Challenges:
• (relatively) low attention paid to licensing
• Low content reuse

10. point of reference: OER
• Advantages:
• Clear arguments about importance of reuse
• Greater potential for grassroots involvement
• Challenges:
• Less mature implementation model
• Tools / standards for OER
• Ongoing licensing debate
• More varied content makes developing a theory
of change di$cult
• Reuse: high potential / still little proof

11. Open all: template
• Repositories
• Metadata
• Author / publisher /
intermediary compliance
• Legal / licensing standards
• Use / reuse practices (by users)

12. LAW

13. Licensing debate
• Strong open licensing is crucial for OER
and other areas, where reuse is of key
importance
• Good reasons to include open licesing in
standards for *any* area
• Public funding – strong argument for fully
open licensing
• Open Knowledge De#nition as a
underlying / uni#ying mechanism for
standards negotiation

14. Poland

15. Poland: Open Textbooks
• Context: OER in Poland in last 5 years
• Coalition for Open Education (KOED)
• Public OER projects
• Grassroots activities
• 2012: Open Textbooks project
• CC BY + WCAG + open format
• No policy behind it

16. Open Public Resources Act
• General model from the „Open
textbooks” project
• Complimentary to Public Sector
Information rules -> together would
form a general open norm for public
content
• Inspiration drawn from AUSGOAL
and NZGOAL frameworks
• 2013: Bill proposal

17. Open Public Resources Act
• Beyond PSI access / reuse rules
• Public or publicly funded (50%?)
• Transfer of rights or co-ownership of
rights to a work (instead of licensing,
a major point of contention)
• Three tiers of openness + opt-out
clause
• Embargo period

18. Poland: State of OA?

19. Beyond the licensing debate
• EU: 2013: Licences for Europe
• The example of Text and Data Mining
(licensing vs. Open Access vs. copyright
exception)
• Risk of using the existence of open
licensing models as an excuse for lack of
copyright reform – example of Elsevier
Content Mining Policy

20. Beyond the licensing debate: CC

21. Beyond the licensing debate: CC
• We are dedicated stewards of our licenses
and tools […] But the CC vision—universal
access to research and education and full
participation in culture—will not be realized
through licensing alone.
• CC licenses are not a substitute for users’
rights, and CC supports ongoing efforts to
reform copyright law to strengthen users’
rights and expand the public domain.

22. Europe: Open all?
• OA: Framework Programs -> Horizon
20202
• OER: „Opening Up Educaton”
• Open data: Reuse Directive
• But also … Copyright Directive:
exceptions & limitations

23. Openwashing
• MOOC (MOPENOC)
• Mark Lester – how are MOOCs open:
• Non-selective
• Not tied to physical location
• No limitations on number of students
• Non full-time, no long commitment
• Low or no cost
• MFLEXIBLEOC?
• Why don’t MOOCs „get” openness?

24. Thank you!