View Post [edit]
Poster: | ARossi | Date: | May 12, 2010 7:34pm |
Forum: | texts | Subject: | Re: Community: A New Name for “Open Source” Collections |
Thanks for your comments. The name change wasn't intended to set software in opposition to literature, or to make any value judgment on the content submitted.
If you go read the definition of Open Source at the link in my original post, I think you'll see why we felt the name wasn't appropriate for these collections. To sum up the pertinent points; Open Source implies allowing free redistribution of the work, giving access to the source material used to make it, and allowing people to use the work to make derivatives.
Community uploaders can certainly join in the spirit of Open Source by putting an appropriate Creative Commons license on their work, but we do not *require* people to do this for their uploads. We want people to share their work at a level of openness that is comfortable for them.
Thanks for taking the time to comment, and I hope you'll enjoy all of the content in our collections (Community or not!). :-)
Alexis
Reply [edit]
Poster: | Time Traveller | Date: | May 12, 2010 8:10pm |
Forum: | texts | Subject: | Re: Community: A New Name for “Open Source” Collections |
And I suspect the IA has been watching the popularity of the social networking sites like Face Book where its all about "community" and has decided to jump on the bandwagon.
Rather than changing names which is just cosmetic, why not make changes that matter, such as more reliable uploading, and the most recent request, better means of cataloguing, as that problem is only going to get worse, seeing how many uploads per hour nowadays.
Signed,
Outspoken melon-throwing Peter.
Reply [edit]
Poster: | garthus | Date: | May 13, 2010 7:15am |
Forum: | texts | Subject: | Re: Community: A New Name for “Open Source” Collections |
This post was modified by garthus on 2010-05-13 14:10:55
This post was modified by garthus on 2010-05-13 14:15:21