Sergio Amadeu da Silveira - Cidadania e Redes Digitais
Sergio Amadeu da Silveira - Cidadania e Redes Digitais
Sergio Amadeu da Silveira - Cidadania e Redes Digitais
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
eng<br />
c i t i z e n s h i p a n d d i g i t a l n e t w o r k s<br />
control of intellectual property through a series of “witch-hunt” actions. The view<br />
of these traditional market representatives is that technology represents the power<br />
of control, and not the possibility of transformation of individuals in digital citizens<br />
by their insertion into a knowledge web (ROSSINI, 2009a).<br />
The philosophy of the OER and OA proposes seeing knowledge as a public asset<br />
of humanity, but one that does not emerge organically from the ICT. It represents a<br />
clear choice of individuals and institutions. In this sense, “openness is an attitude” 4<br />
— and it is the same attitude that marked the original thinkers 5 and developers of<br />
the Internet and of the World Wide Web 6 , and also permeates the ideals of freeware.<br />
Furthermore, the OER and OA, when well executed, make the content available<br />
as a fertile base for connected learning, for they authorize the use, the remix,<br />
the link, the translation and a<strong>da</strong>ptation of that knowledge. We call this “fertile<br />
base” digital commons. This view is supported by the notion that considers the very<br />
knowledge as a collective social product that forms commons that must be accessible<br />
to all. The digital commons is the result of the use of open and volunteer tools, such<br />
as the licenses of Creative Commons 7 and freeware, upon the creation, publication<br />
and distribution of educational and scientific content. In other words, it is the result<br />
of this openness attitude.<br />
One key element that enabled the openness movements was the reduction of<br />
the reproduction and distribution costs of new contents to almost zero, after its<br />
4. http://www.ethanzuckerman.com/blog/2010/05/11/elliot-maxwell-on-the-implications-of-openness.<br />
5. http://w2.eff.org/Censorship/Internet_censorship_bills/barlow_0296.declaration.<br />
6. David Isenberg, former engineer of AT&T, captures that perfectly: “The Internet derives its disruptive<br />
quality from a very special property: IT IS PUBLIC. The core of the Internet is a body of simple,<br />
public agreements, called RFCs, which specify the structure of the Internet Protocol packet. These<br />
public agreements don’t need to be ratified or officially approved — they just need to be widely adopted<br />
and used (...) The Internet’s component technologies — routing, storage, transmission etc. — can be<br />
improved in private. But the Internet Protocol itself is hurt by private changes, because its very strength<br />
is its public-ness.” http://isen.com/blog/2009/04/broadband-without-internet-ain-worth.html.<br />
7. Creative Commons provides copyright licenses that create a more flexible management model of<br />
such rights and, at the same time, ensure protection and freedom to the artist. Instead of stating that<br />
all rights are reserved, the author has the power of specifically choosing which uses they intend to allow<br />
or forbid. It is possible, for instance, to authorize the sharing of the work, but prohibiting any use for<br />
business purpose. Adhesion is voluntary, and each author shall decide if they use the licenses in their<br />
work. See more at www.creativecommons.org and watch explanatory videos at http://www.creativecommons.org.br/videos/Get-Creative-nova-versao.swf.<br />
216