For example, is copyright really an issue for teachers in Kenya? I doubt it. It certainly wasn't a an issue where I worked in NZ 3 years ago. By that I mean, no one was concerning themselves with issues of copyright, so no one was affected by it. People happily taking images from a general Google image search and placing them in their slide presentations without a second thought. It's only when we go outside our individual practice, where our work represents something larger than ourselves (like an institution) that we may be confronted with issues of copyright... that there is an interesting point of difference to consider in terms of the benefits of remaining small and agile in practice...
If a place has no conception of the idea that an expression of an idea could be property, then does the introduction of OER become a vehicle for furthering cultural colonisation through copyright? Would it be right for a country like the USA, and those with similar such notions, to encourage a nation who has no conception of such a property to begin releasing its "intellectual property" as open?
“There is an overall culture of sharing knowledge here, even if this isn’t called ‘Creative Commons’ We had the launch of CCIndia in early 2007, but there seems to be little activity there… I think CC is a bit too conservative and too respectful of copyright issues. Copyright has not worked for us (in the developing world) for generations. Generally speaking, copyright in any form, including CC, doesn’t fit in too well with Asian ideas of knowledge, since it enables those controlling knowledge and information over the rest, and we find it impossible to emerge winners in this game. It is a colonial law, not meant to serve the interest of the people of those parts of the globe that are not ahead in the information race! Why should we be as respectful to it, as, say, Lawrence Lessig is?”In many respects, OER and the Creative Commons licenses help propel US centered ideas of copyright and intellectual property, indirectly inserting such ideas on the back of moral concepts such as sharing, freedom and openness, as though sharing, freedom and openness didn't exist before, and that the only way to protect such notions is with legal instruments that recognise copyrights in the first place!
Indian journalist Frederick Noronha as quoted by Marco Fiorette in his article Tragedy of the Commons.
I attended the sessions at the Open Education Conference in Vancouver by Lila Bailey, Counsel, ccLearn, Creative Commons, and Lindsey Weeramuni, Intellectual Property Supervisor, MIT OpenCourseWare. Lila did a pretty good job of explaining the issues around Creative Commons' and ccLearn's global ideas, but one thing that struck me is that it all stems from US law in the first place. I asked why instead doesn't CC International and ccLearn find a country with more progressive laws (if any) relating to copyright, and use that as a basis to build up a creative commons. Obviously it couldn't work because for some well known if all too often unquestioned reasons - US law is the dominant force in copyright. My question was a red herring.
Glory By Binyavanga Wainaina questioning other Western born "aid" initiatives.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons (Attribution) license.