http://www.creativecommons.org

I was recently looking through my archives to find a piece on Creative Commons (CC) to share with an acquaintance, and was surprised when I could not find one. Why had I not written something about one of the things I feel most passionate about? I don’t know the answer to that question, so instead of answering it, I will render it moot with this post.

I recently wrote of copyright that it is like a battle between content creators and content users, with each trying to find the best deal for themselves. The battle itself is umpired by the law, and all of these forces must constantly contend with changing technology in trying to find a balance. I believe that most current copyright laws are too strongly in favour of the creator: copyright terms are too long, fair use is not expansive enough and remix for personal use is not permitted. A common reaction to this problem is to simply work outside of the law and pirate copyrighted works. I can understand why people take this road, as it is perceived to be the only way to fight back against an unfair system. However, as a content creator myself, I cannot bring myself to simply steal the work of others.

The best solution to this problem is, as far as I can see, the one mapped out by Creative Commons, which was created by famed copyright lawyer Lawrence Lessig. The premise behind Creative Commons is to provide a simple way for content creators to control the use of their work. This is done through a simple licensing system, which uses 3 simple options to represent what can and cannot be done with a piece of work. Behind these options, which are represented by icons, sits a license which translates them into a legalese document. This means that instead of fighting against copyright law, the system works from within it. By applying a CC license to their work, creators are opting out of strictly prohibitive copyright, and empowering their audience to redistribute and reuse their work.

Whilst this might sound rather dry and abstract, it is in fact incredibly powerful and creative. Consider this example: say I am making a movie, and need some music for the soundtrack. Traditionally my options are to either break the law (pirate someone’s work) or work within it (pay a creator for their work). Usually, if I pay for someone’s work I am not even free to change it to meet my needs. With Creative Commons, however, I can use an online service, such as Jamendo to locate music whose creators have applied a CC license to it: depending on the options selected in the license, I may well be able to freely include that music into my work and make even make money from it. The effect of all of this is to reduce the barriers to the production of high quality, creative work, allowing the return to a culture that is created by individuals and not just large corporations. To me this is huge, as it allows us to express ourselves freely and thus forge a our own culture. In all of this, technology makes such creation easy, but Creative Commons provides the raw materials that make it free and legal.

As an educator, you might wonder why you should care about any of this. The reasons are simple. From a philosophical point of view, education is built on knowledge, which is created through sharing. Ergo, anything that promotes sharing is good for education. From a practical point of view, Creative Commons gives you access to literally millions of creative works, which you and your students can build on, legally, to create incredibly rich learning experiences. And finally, you can use Creative Commons to encourage your students to engage with the world around them by contributing their own creativity. A lot of people do not feel that their creations are worth sharing, but the truth is that you never know how other people might use your work to express themselves. Once you realise the true worth of your work within such an open system, the urge to share and connect is hard to resist.

Hopefully this post has given you an insight into what Creative Commons is all about, and perhaps even why it is something you might want to try. I am currently working on a follow-up which will contain far more practical detail on how you can use Creative Commons to enrich your teaching practice. In the meantime, the two following videos might help to shed more light on the beauty of CC:

A Shared Culture

(Original work, CC BY-NC-SA)

Building On The Past

(Original work, CC BY-NC)

http://www.ted.com/talks/margaret_stewart_how_youtube…

Copyright is an area of immense interest for me: I cannot say exactly why, but I think it is to do with the interplay of creativity, reward and culture. I mostly think of copyright as being a battle between the content creators and content users, with each trying to find the best deal for themselves. Lawmakers, swayed by one side or the other, pass legislation to maintain a balance of some kind (currently far too much in favour of the creators). And technology provides a landscape which is constantly changing, requiring all players to exert effort to maintain equilibrium for themselves and the system as a whole. At the core of copyright is the issue of our culture, and specifically how we create, transmit and enjoy its artifacts (such as music, video and books).

Of late, we have seen many attempts by content creators (recording artists, move directors) and their representatives (MPAA, RIAA) to block technological developments that they see as harmful to their interests. This often leads to a strong perceived delineation between bad/evil/greedy creators and poor/choiceless consumers. In many instances this delineation seems to be fair and accurate, for example when Paramount attempted to claim copyright over someone’s footage of the public filming of movie.

However, every so often we catch a glimpse of developments that are distinctly more subtle in their effort to create benefit for all. My standard examples of these instances are Creative Commons and the Open Source movement. Having watched this fascinating video, I think I might now have a third example. The video deals with YouTube’s automated efforts to allow content creators to have control over their content in such a way that uses economic incentives to encourage them to permit remix and reuse. This softly-softly approach seems to be a great way to get big corporations interested in the power of participatory culture, whilst allowing them to maintain ownership over their content.

From an information technology perspective, the video provides great insights into the way that YouTube uses technology to process, analise and make decisions upon huge numbers of videos. It also illustrates many interesting points regarding information processes, and shows that systems are not just composed of technology, but also consist of people, policies and data. I think many students will definitely be interested to see what happens behind the scenes on the world’s most popular video sharing platform.

I am certainly interested to learn more about YouTube’s efforts in this area, and would love to see this system fulfill its potential to empower individuals to create culture rather than simply consume it. As to whether or not it will, who knows, but given Google’s long history of pushing the envelope when it comes to copyright, it just might.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waldseemuller_map

The Waldseemüller map is a world map drawn by German cartographer Martin Waldseemüller and originally published in April 1507. The map consists of 12 panels, arranged in a 4×3 grid, totaling 2.48 by 1.38 meters when wall mounted into a single piece. It was one of the first maps to chart latitude and longitude precisely; following the example of Ptolemy; and was the first map to use the name “America”. The map provides a great tool for engaging students in critical thinking, especially in relation to the development and spread of “Western” civilisation around the world. Students can be asked to consider questions such as “why were the Mediterranean and Arabic worlds so well mapped?”, “why was Australia not on the map?” and “why does America appear so thin?”. Another angle that can be taken is considering how technology has changed the art of cartography, and what the implications are for society and our sense of self.

Wikimedia (Wikipedia’s media warehouse) contains a huge digital version of this map: at 13,708 × 7,590 pixels and 19.65 MB it is big enough to crash some browsers. This gives plenty of detail for up-close inspection.

http://www.ted.com/talks/michael_specter_the_danger…

In an age where we rely so heavily on technology, more and more people are starting to doubt and deny the science that underlies it. In this fascinating  talk, Michael Specter discusses the danger of such denial. Examples include the supposed link between autism and vaccinations, the growth of alternative medicine and, controversially, genetically modified foods.

This video is a great tool for engaging students to think critically about important issues, such as the nature of truth and information (e.g. why do some ideas become so well established despite a complete lack of empirical evidence?). From this, students can be asked to consider the misleading role the media often plays in this process, and how the scientific community can respond.

To fully understand the power of denial in the face of evidence, we need not look further than the current debate over climate change as a destructive and man-made phenomenon. This is a hypothesis backed by the vast majority of scientists worldwide, yet corporations, governments and the media are denying the need for immediate action.

http://noimpactman.typepad.com/

Colin Beavan (a.k.a No Impact Man) dedicated a year of his life to trying to reduce his environmental impact to zero. He stopped taking taxis, trains and elevators, only ate food grown within 250 miles of his home, left the power grid, stopped buying anything new and stopped making trash.

His inspiring book and blog follow his adventures, and attempt to distill from them a way for humanity to move forward without destroying the environment. No Impact Man’s approach is interesting as it focuses both inward and outward, calling into question the materialistic, wasteful and inefficient way we live our lives. He questions why we work so hard to buy things, when surely spending time with out friends and family will in fact bring us more happiness. This book is crammed full of interesting and surprising facts and figures, but is approachable enough to make a introduction to serious environmental issues.

http://www.onlineschools.org/blog/everything-fast-food/

This interesting visualisation paints a picture of fast food as an unhealthy yet profitable industry. A good tool to encourage students to think critically about the companies they interact with everyday.

http://blogs.denverpost.com/captured/2009/03/23/photographer-collection-emilio-morenatti/

This collection of photos provide great stimulus for an almost limitless range of tasks including descriptive writing, character studies, studying culture and difference.

http://snopes.com/

A useful site for debunking urban legends and myths: can be used to teach information literacy to students.

When I was younger I operated to what I held as a strict, innate moral code. I believed I was, by my very nature, a good person. As time has passed I have behaved in different ways, learned new things and been exposed to many more people. This has caused me to realise the fallacy of my earlier beliefs. It seems to me now, that humans are, without passing judgement on any individual, simply base animals. What appears to set us aside from other animals is our development of complex culture, language and society. Obviously this is due to biological differences, but as DNA has shown this represents a relatively small difference. The way I see it now is that our biological differences have, over time, tiny step by tiny step, allowed us to build up a facade of non-animal behaviour. This behaviour is passed from generation to generation, and as such allows us to maintain a continuous history of relatively steady behaviour. Over time we have come to see this behaviour as being innate: something that makes us different (superior) to other species. Cases of humans “raised by animals” show us clearly that a single generation, removed from our societal constructs, reverts with alarming speed to “primitive” state.

If this belief is accurate, then, the most important question we can ask is what are the mechanisms through which society is reproduced from one generation to the next? I would propose that the traditional answers of family and school are at the centre of this issue. Over the last 100 years I would also imagine, certainly in Western Europe and North America, that mass media has largely displaced the Church as a means for social reproduction.

As both a parent and a teacher-to-be, this line of reasoning has really made me pull up and think for a minute. How can I play my part in this continuum of human behaviour? Which aspects do I wish to propagate and which do I wish to subdue? The answers to these questions might have to wait for another time…

http://www.jamendo.com

Jamendo is a fantastic source for music that students can legally use in their own creative works. Shared under Creative Commons licenses, the site offers a whole range of sounds, much of which is very professional in its composition, performance and production.