DOCSLIB.ORG

Incorporating the Commons: a Political Economic Analysis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

INCORPORATING THE COMMONS: A POLITICAL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF CORPORATE INVOLVEMENT IN FREE AND OPEN SOURCE SOFTWARE by BENJAMIN J. BIRKINBINE A DISSERTATION Presented to the School of Journalism and Communication and the Graduate School of the University of Oregon in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy September 2014 DISSERTATION APPROVAL PAGE Student: Benjamin J. Birkinbine Title: Incorporating the Commons: A Political Economic Analysis of Corporate Involvement in Free and Open Source Software This dissertation has been accepted and approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy degree in the School of Journalism and Communication by: Dr. Janet Wasko Chairperson Dr. Biswarup Sen Core Member Dr. Gabriela Martinez Core Member Eric Priest, J.D. Institutional Representative and J. Andrew Berglund Dean of the Graduate School Original approval signatures are on file with the University of Oregon Graduate School. Degree awarded September 2014 ii DISSERTATION ABSTRACT Benjamin J. Birkinbine Doctor of Philosophy School of Journalism and Communication September 2014 Title: Incorporating the Commons: A Political Economic Analysis of Corporate Involvement in Free and Open Source Software Free (libre) and open source software (FLOSS) emerged in the 1980s as a radical alternative to proprietary software. Fighting back against what FLOSS enthusiasts viewed as overly restrictive intellectual property protections placed on proprietary software, FLOSS was designed with the intent of granting users the right to study, modify, adapt, or otherwise tinker with the source code of software. As such, FLOSS users were able to collaborate in producing software that could be distributed freely and widely to others, who could, in turn, make changes to the software. As FLOSS projects grew in popularity, the productive process was spread throughout a broad network of distributed users, all of whom could work on the code. The result of this process was the creation of robust, effective, and efficient forms of software that could compete with those offered by large software companies. Increasingly, however, some of those large software companies became involved in the development of FLOSS projects. On its face, this may seem to be a contradiction of interests. Why would a for-profit company invest in the development of software that is made freely available for others to use? This is the contradiction that lies at the heart of this research project. More specifically, this project looks at the dynamics that exist iv between communities of FLOSS developers and the corporations that are involved in or make use of their projects. Working from a critical political economy perspective, this study complicates theories of the commons and commons-based peer production by illustrating how FLOSS processes and products are being incorporated into broader corporate structures and strategies. The three case studies presented – Red Hat, Microsoft, and Oracle's acquisition of Sun Microsystems – exemplify different elements of this dynamic. Red Hat provides an example of how a company that relies exclusively on free software can be turned into a profitable business. The Microsoft case demonstrates why the company has undergone a transition from vehement opposition to FLOSS toward a more supportive position. Finally, Oracle's acquisition of Sun Microsystems demonstrates how FLOSS communities cope with changing ownership structures and unwanted corporate interference into their projects. v CURRICULUM VITAE NAME OF AUTHOR: Benjamin J. Birkinbine GRADUATE AND UNDERGRADUATE SCHOOLS ATTENDED: University of Oregon, Eugene, OR Southern Illinois University Carbondale, Carbondale, IL University of Wisconsin-Green Bay, Green Bay, WI DEGREES AWARDED: Doctor of Philosophy, Media Studies, 2014, University of Oregon Master of Arts, Media Theory and Research, 2010, Southern Illinois University Carbondale Bachelor of Arts, Communication, 2005, University of Wisconsin-Green Bay AREAS OF INTEREST: Political Economy of Communication Open Source Technology Communication Theory Media Studies PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE Graduate Teaching Fellow, School of Journalism and Communication, University of Oregon, 2010-2014 Teaching/Research Assistant, College of Mass Communication and Media Arts, Southern Illinois University Carbondale, 2008-2010 Instructor, Department of Communication, University of Wisconsin-Green Bay, 2006-2008 GRANTS, AWARDS, AND HONORS The Dallas Smythe Award, Awarded by the International Association of Media and Communication Researchers for the paper, “Incorporating the commons: Toward a political economy of corporate involvement in free and open source software,” 2014. Digital Scholarship Center Graduate Affiliate, 2014 vi Rapid Response Grant, Co-sponsored by the Open Society Foundation and the International Association for Media and Communication Researchers, 2014 The Columbia Scholarship, School of Journalism and Communication, University of Oregon, 2013 Outstanding Teaching by a Doctoral Student, School of Journalism and Communication, University of Oregon, 2013 Glenn Starlin Fellowship, School of Journalism and Communication, University of Oregon, 2013 Nominee for Doctoral Research Fellowship, School of Journalism and Communication, University of Oregon, 2013 The Columbia Scholarship, School of Journalism and Communication, University of Oregon, 2011 Lucien P. Arant Scholarship, School of Journalism and Communication, University of Oregon, 2010 vii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS No project as formidable as a dissertation can ever be undertaken in complete isolation. Along the way, I've had inspiration, assistance, advice, critiques, clarifications, and collaboration with numerous people who made this possible. I cannot do justice to the entire community who helped, but I would like to thank a few in particular. I thank my dissertation committee for their patience, comments, and critiques. Janet Wasko was an incredibly gracious, accommodating, and fun adviser throughout the process. Bish Sen provided critical feedback and always pushed me to think about the broader implications of my work. Gabriela Martinez was equally supportive, provided great feedback, and was always available for conversations. Finally, Eric Priest became one of the few law professors to serve on a dissertation committee at the University of Oregon. He deserves additional credit for coordinating his involvement while the law school followed a different academic calendar than the rest of the university. I thank the members of my cohort – Toby Hopp, Erica Ciszek, Francesco Somaini, Brant Burkey, and Fatoumata Sow – who were sources of inspiration, support, and friendship. In addition, I would like to thank Jeremy Swartz for the introduction to open source and the guided tour of my first Open Source Convention (OSCON) in Portland in the summer of 2011. That experience, along with the ensuing discussions about the broader implications of open source, led to a change in my academic focus that ultimately provided the impetus for this study. I'm also thankful for the support and friendship of Brenna Wolf-Monteiro, Tewodros Workneh, Randall Livingstone, Jacob Dittmer, Lauren Bratslavsky, Glenn Morris, Karen Estlund, Andre Sirois, Jolene Fisher, and Geoff Ostrove. viii Outside the School of Journalism and Communication, Kat at the ResNet Help Desk helped me with my first Linux install. Without her initial help, this journey may have not been possible. I am now happy to say that I've passed the gift along to others. John Russell and everyone at the Digital Scholarship Center provided support and were always willing to assist in whatever way they could. In addition, the members of the Eugene Unix Gnu Linux Users Group (EUGLUG) were an incredibly welcoming group of people who were kind and patient enough to help a total noob like myself with various Linux questions. I would especially like to thank Larry Price and Jacob Riddle for setting aside extended periods of time to help me with this project and related topics. Last, but certainly not least, I would like to thank my family. I thank my mother and father for their years of support and patience as I've pursued graduate studies. Undoubtedly, without you, none of this would be possible, and I am forever indebted. My sister, Ann, inspires a wealth of adjectives: congenial, affable, good-humored, gregarious, etc., and I'm thankful for the years of fun we've shared. My son, Caden, was only two years old when this journey began, and he is now well on his way to becoming a young man. I've enjoyed watching you grow over these years, and I look forward to many more. You are a blessing. Finally, my love and inspiration, Roberta, meu coração. You have truly been wonderful throughout all these years. In the past, I have seen other writers thank their partners, they allude to the fact that a great deal of patience is necessary to cope with someone who is going through the process of writing a dissertation. I now know what they mean, and I am truly fortunate to have had you as a companion throughout this process. You are truly a gift. ix For the community, and para o meu coração. x TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page I. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................... 1 Situating Free (Libre) and Open Source Software................................................. 6 History of Computing and Software...............................................................
Recommended publications
  • A NEW VISION of the KNOWLEDGE ECONOMY Brian Chi-Ang Lin National Chengchi University

    A NEW VISION of the KNOWLEDGE ECONOMY Brian Chi-Ang Lin National Chengchi University

    A NEW VISION OF THE KNOWLEDGE ECONOMY Brian Chi-ang Lin National Chengchi University Abstract. To date, more than half of the output in the major OECD countries has been knowledge based. This paper argues, however, that the current growth- oriented exposition of the knowledge economy rooted in the conventional concept of free competition is insufficient for promoting the long-term development of human societies. Although we now live in a knowledge economy, most countries have been concurrently characterized by serious phenomena such as environmental degradation and growing economic inequality. The prospect of meeting global commitments, for instance, to reducing inequality, as outlined in the 1995 World Summit for Social Development in Copenhagen and endorsed in the United Nations Millennium Declaration, is bleak and the global society as a whole has become less and less sustainable. Indeed, the world is better seen as composed of numerous (but finite) knowledge economies. To take up the challenge of sustainable development of human societies, we have to develop a pluralistic perspective of the knowledge economy and fully acknowledge the characteristics of each unique knowledge system (such as indigenous knowledge possessed by a small tribe). Once we can help each individual knowledge system develop into a specific set of economic institutions that freely exchange concepts and beliefs with each other in a global environment, we will be able to develop a global economy that embodies a value-committed basis that assures a sustainable path of development on earth. Keywords. Economic inequality; Growth; Indigenous knowledge; Sustainable development; The knowledge economy There are changes in other spheres too which we must expect to come.
  • International Intellectual Property Law

    International Intellectual Property Law

    ee--RRGG Electronic Resource Guide International Intellectual Property Law * Jonathan Franklin This page was last updated February 8, 2013. his electronic resource guide, often called the ERG, has been published online by the American Society of International Law (ASIL) since 1997. T Since then it has been systematically updated and continuously expanded. The chapter format of the ERG is designed to be used by students, teachers, practitioners and researchers as a self-guided tour of relevant, quality, up-to-date online resources covering important areas of international law. The ERG also serves as a ready-made teaching tool at graduate and undergraduate levels. The narrative format of the ERG is complemented and augmented by EISIL (Electronic Information System for International Law), a free online database that organizes and provides links to, and useful information on, web resources from the full spectrum of international law. EISIL's subject-organized format and expert-provided content also enhances its potential as teaching tool. 2 This page was last updated February 8, 2013. I. Introduction II. Overview III. Research Guides and Bibliographies a. International Intellectual Property Law b. International Patent Law i. Public Health and IP ii. Agriculture, Plant Varieties, and IP c. International Copyright Law i. Art, Cultural Property, and IP d. International Trademark Law e. Trade and IP f. Arbitration, Mediation, and IP g. Traditional Knowledge and IP h. Geographical Indications IV. General Search Strategies V. Primary Sources VI. Primary National Legislation and Decisions VII. Recommended Link sites VIII. Selected Non-Governmental Organizations IX. Electronic Current Awareness 3 This page was last updated February 8, 2013.
  • The Cathedral and the Bazaar Eric Steven Raymond Thyrsus Enterprises [

    The Cathedral and the Bazaar Eric Steven Raymond Thyrsus Enterprises [

    The Cathedral and the Bazaar Eric Steven Raymond Thyrsus Enterprises [http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/] <[email protected]> This is version 3.0 Copyright © 2000 Eric S. Raymond Copyright Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the Open Publication License, version 2.0. $Date: 2002/08/02 09:02:14 $ Revision History Revision1.57 11September2000 esr New major section “How Many Eyeballs Tame Complexity”. Revision1.52 28August2000 esr MATLAB is a reinforcing parallel to Emacs. Corbatoó & Vyssotsky got it in 1965. Revision1.51 24August2000 esr First DocBook version. Minor updates to Fall 2000 on the time-sensitive material. Revision1.49 5May2000 esr Added the HBS note on deadlines and scheduling. Revision1.51 31August1999 esr This the version that O’Reilly printed in the first edition of the book. Revision1.45 8August1999 esr Added the endnotes on the Snafu Principle, (pre)historical examples of bazaar development, and originality in the bazaar. Revision 1.44 29 July 1999 esr Added the “On Management and the Maginot Line” section, some insights about the usefulness of bazaars for exploring design space, and substantially improved the Epilog. Revision1.40 20Nov1998 esr Added a correction of Brooks based on the Halloween Documents. Revision 1.39 28 July 1998 esr I removed Paul Eggert’s ’graph on GPL vs. bazaar in response to cogent aguments from RMS on Revision1.31 February101998 esr Added “Epilog: Netscape Embraces the Bazaar!” Revision1.29 February91998 esr Changed “free software” to “open source”. Revision1.27 18November1997 esr Added the Perl Conference anecdote. Revision 1.20 7 July 1997 esr Added the bibliography.
  • Ecological Economics and Sustainable Development, Selected Essays of Herman Daly ADVANCES in ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS Series Editor:Jeroen C.J.M

    Ecological Economics and Sustainable Development, Selected Essays of Herman Daly ADVANCES in ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS Series Editor:Jeroen C.J.M

    Ecological Economics and Sustainable Development, Selected Essays of Herman Daly ADVANCES IN ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS Series Editor:Jeroen C.J.M. van den Bergh, ICREA Professor, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain and Professor of Environmental and Resource Economics, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands Founding Editor:Robert Costanza, Director, University of Maryland Institute for Ecological Economics and Professor, Center for Environmental and Estuarine Studies and Zoology Department, USA This important series makes a significant contribution to the development of the principles and practices of ecological economics, a field which has expanded dra- matically in recent years. The series provides an invaluable forum for the publica- tion of high quality work and shows how ecological economic analysis can make a contribution to understanding and resolving important problems. The main emphasis of the series is on the development and application of new original ideas in ecological economics. International in its approach, it includes some of the best theoretical and empirical work in the field with contributions to funda- mental principles, rigorous evaluations of existing concepts, historical surveys and future visions. It seeks to address some of the most important theoretical questions and gives policy solutions for the ecological problems confronting the global village as we move into the twenty-first century. Titles in the series include: Economic Growth, Material Flows and the Environment New Applications of Structural Decomposition Analysis and Physical Input–Output Tables Rutger Hoekstra Joint Production and Responsibility in Ecological Economics On the Foundations of Environmental Policy Stefan Baumgärtner, Malte Faber and Johannes Schiller Frontiers in Ecological Economic Theory and Application Edited by Jon D.
  • Open Source Projects As Incubators of Innovation

    Open Source Projects As Incubators of Innovation

    RESEARCH CONTRIBUTIONS TO ORGANIZATIONAL SOCIOLOGY AND INNOVATION STUDIES / STUTTGARTER BEITRÄGE ZUR ORGANISATIONS- UND INNOVATIONSSOZIOLOGIE SOI Discussion Paper 2017-03 Open Source Projects as Incubators of Innovation From Niche Phenomenon to Integral Part of the Software Industry Jan-Felix Schrape Institute for Social Sciences Organizational Sociology and Innovation Studies Jan-Felix Schrape Open Source Projects as Incubators of Innovation. From Niche Phenomenon to Integral Part of the Software Industry. SOI Discussion Paper 2017-03 University of Stuttgart Institute for Social Sciences Department of Organizational Sociology and Innovation Studies Seidenstr. 36 D-70174 Stuttgart Editor Prof. Dr. Ulrich Dolata Tel.: +49 711 / 685-81001 [email protected] Managing Editor Dr. Jan-Felix Schrape Tel.: +49 711 / 685-81004 [email protected] Research Contributions to Organizational Sociology and Innovation Studies Discussion Paper 2017-03 (May 2017) ISSN 2191-4990 © 2017 by the author(s) Jan-Felix Schrape is senior researcher at the Department of Organizational Sociology and Innovation Studies, University of Stuttgart (Germany). [email protected] Additional downloads from the Department of Organizational Sociology and Innovation Studies at the Institute for Social Sciences (University of Stuttgart) are filed under: http://www.uni-stuttgart.de/soz/oi/publikationen/ Abstract Over the last 20 years, open source development has become an integral part of the software industry and a key component of the innovation strategies of all major IT providers. Against this backdrop, this paper seeks to develop a systematic overview of open source communities and their socio-economic contexts. I begin with a recon- struction of the genesis of open source software projects and their changing relation- ships to established IT companies.
  • Shared Source Licensing Program for the Windows Embedded Compact (Formerly Windows CE) Platform

    Shared Source Licensing Program for the Windows Embedded Compact (Formerly Windows CE) Platform

    9/6/2020 Shared Source Initiative | Licensing Program for the Windows Embedded Compact Platform Search Microsoft.com PRODUCTS STORE DOWNLOADS SUPPORT United States Shared Source Initiative > Windows Embedded Compact Source Licensing Program Shared Source Licensing Program for the Windows® Embedded Compact (formerly Windows CE) Platform Shared Source Licensing Programs Overview Microsoft offers a Shared Source licensing program for the Windows Embedded Compact (formerly Windows CE) platform. This program is applicable to the Windows Embedded Compact and Windows Embedded CE products. The Windows Embedded Shared Source program helps OEMs and developers speed development, reduce troubleshooting and code debugging time, receive assistance in remote device support and gain a deeper technical understanding of Windows Embedded Compact software. Public/Sample Source code is built at no additional cost into the purchased copies of the Windows Embedded Compact Platform Builder toolkit and provides access to nearly 4 million lines of code. Depending on a partner’s needs and qualifications, deeper levels of Shared Source code access (Private and Premium) are available. How to Participate Public/Sample Shared Source Public/Sample Shared Source code is available at no additional cost with each purchased copy of the Windows Embedded Compact 7 Platform Builder toolkit. Private Shared Source Private Shared Source Code is an optional component of the Windows Embedded Compact 7 Platform Builder toolkit that can be installed during the setup process. The toolkit user must electronically accept the terms and conditions of the Shared Source licensing agreement (EULA) before the Private source code can be installed. Premium Derivatives Program Microsoft also offers Premium access to advanced Windows Embedded Compact 7 source code through the Premium Derivatives licensing program.
  • Globalizing Intellectual Property: Linkage and the Challenge of a Justice-Constituency

    Globalizing Intellectual Property: Linkage and the Challenge of a Justice-Constituency

    GLOBALIZING INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY: LINKAGE AND THE CHALLENGE OF A JUSTICE-CONSTITUENCY SAMUELK. MURUMBA* 1. INTRODUCTION There are historical moments in which invisible forces take a perfectly good idea and turn it into an ideology or even an idol. Such seems to be the case with intellectual property. Twenty years ago, intellectual property hardly existed as such. Its individ­ ual components-copyrights, patents, trademarks , etc.-had been around for a long time, of course, but they had not coalesced into anything comparable to the unified body of law we have today. Nor were they central to legal practice or significant to law school curriculum. Indeed, as recently as the beginning of the 1980s, de­ bate was still raging over the appropriate name to give to this emerging field ("industrial property" or "intellectual property") and over its precise boundaries. Almost overnight, however, in­ tellectual property has changed from a complex and generally eso­ teric body of law-the preserve of specialists in technology and entertainment law-to the stuff of folklore and conversation at cocktail parties, and for some, almost an object of worship. Intel­ lectual property now frequently appears in the company of such lofty notions as freedom and democracy, and has even been hailed as a more potent weapon than bombs and missiles for use against dictators!*'� * Professor of Law, Brooklyn Law School; LL.B. (Honors) (Makerere Uni­ versity, Kampala); LL.M.; Ph.D. (Monash University, Melbourne, Australia). This paJ?er was presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Society of InternatiOnal Law, International Economic Law Interest Group, Washington, D.C., December 5, 1997.
  • Final Exam Review History of Science 150

    Final Exam Review History of Science 150

    Final Exam Review History of Science 150 1. Format of the Exam 90 minutes, on canvas 12:25pm December 18. You are welcome to bring notes to the exam, so you could start by filling out this sheet with notes from lectures and the readings! Like the mid-term, the final exam will have two kinds of questions. 1) Multiple choice questions examining your knowledge of key concepts, terms, historical developments, and contexts 2) Short answer questions in which ask you to draw on things you’ve learned in the course (from lecture, readings, videos) to craft a short argument in a brief essay expressing your informed issue on a historical question 2. Sample Questions Multiple Choice: Mina Rees was involved in (and wrote about) which of the following computing projects? A) Silicon Valley start-ups in the dot-com period B) Charles Babbage’s Difference Engine C) Works Projects Administration Tables Project D) Federal funding for computing research after WWII Short Answer: (Your answers should be between 100-200 words, and keep to specifics (events, machines, developments, people) that demonstrate your knowledge of materials covered from the course) A) What are two historical factors important to the development of Silicon Valley’s technology industry after World War II? B) In what ways did the field of programming change (in terms of its status and workers) between World War II and the late 1960s? 3. Topics to Review: Below, is a list of ideas to review for the final exam, which covers material through the entire course. You should review in particular, lecture notes, O’Mara’s The Code and other course readings provided on Canvas.
  • Robert P Merges What Kind of Rights Are Intellectual Property Rights?

    Robert P Merges What Kind of Rights Are Intellectual Property Rights?

    Robert P Merges What Kind of Rights Are Intellectual Property Rights? Forthcoming in Rochelle C Dreyfuss & Justine Pila (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Intellectual Property Law © RP Merges 2017 Table of Contents 1. Intellectual Property as a Right 1.1 Intellectual Property Rights Are Property Rights 1.2 The Basic Features of Intellectual Property as Property 1.2.1 The Right to Control Uses 1.2.2 The Right to Transfer 1.2.3 The Special Case of Waiver 1.3 Limitations on Intellectual Property Rights 2. What Kind of Rights? Hohfeld and Intellectual Property 2.1 Claim Right/Duty 2.2 Privilege/No Claim 2.3 Power/Liability 2.4 Immunity/Disability 2.5 Hohfeld: Conclusion 3. Obstacles to Conceiving Intellectual Property as Property 3.1 Intellectual Property Acquisition and Misunderstandings About What it Means to be a Right 3.2 What, No Automatic Injunction? That’s Not Property! 3.3 Why Intellectual Property Rights Are Not ‘Regulation’ 3.3.2 The Second Sense of ‘Regulation’ 3.3.3 Freedom and Permission 3.3.4 Freedoms in Historical Perspective 3.4 Intellectual Property Rights as Property Rights: Summing Up 4. Problems With Conceiving Intellectual Property as Property 4.1 Group Ownership 4.2 Intellectual Property As Constitutional Property: The Takings Problem 5. Conclusion 1. Intellectual Property Rights as Rights Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2959073 The phrase is common enough that it rolls off the tongue: intellectual property rights. It even has a well-known acronym, ‘IPRs.’1 But are they really rights? And if so, what kind of rights? Most importantly, what difference does it make that they are rights – what practical import does this carry? These are the questions I take up here.
  • Intellectual Property and Information Technology

    Intellectual Property and Information Technology

    Intellectual Property and Information Technology Cover or Section Title • 1 Dentons’ Kazakhstan Intellectual Property practice will select the right options to suit your business needs, whether you are assessing an IP portfolio, performing due diligence for an acquisition, securing a patent, trademark, trade secret or copyright or need to resolve a dispute through litigation or other means. We are uniquely positioned to help, with a full-service IP practice that is integrated with other practices, providing you with comprehensive and tailored legal solutions. Our enviable track record includes representing entrepreneurs, artists, public institutions, emerging companies and global corporations. We are pioneers in researching cloud computing regulation in Kazakhstan. Given that there are no special (complex) regulations regarding cloud computing in the country, a set of normative acts are applicable, which requires a thorough knowledge of the national security law, personal data law, law on banks and banking activity, informatization, etc. 2 • Cover or Section Title The leading legal practice in Kazakhstan Overview The leading legal practice in Kazakhstan. Dentons is the only international law firm with a full-service IP practice in Kazakhstan. It comprises five professionals: a Partner, two lawyers, including a qualified Patent and Trademark Attorney of the Republic of Kazakhstan and two paralegals. Dentons’ IP and TMT practice is recognized as Tier 1 in Kazakhstan, according to The Legal 500. In 2021, our practice was also included in the World Trademark Review (WTR 1000) ranking. Wide list of services We can assist you with IP protection (procedural issues of registration of the exclusive rights to items of intellectual property) and issues of IP enforcement at pre-litigation (including administrative proceedings with state bodies) and litigation stages.
  • Knowledge Commons

    Knowledge Commons

    Working Paper No. 2018-39 December 2018 Knowledge Commons Forthcoming in Hudson, Blake, Rosenbloom, Jonathan, and Cole, Dan eds. Routledge Handbook of the Study of the Commons, Abingdon, UK: Routledge Michael J. Madison University of Pittsburgh – School of Law Katherine J. Strandburg New York University – School of Law Brett M. Frischmann Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law University of Pittsburgh School of Law 3900 Forbes Avenue Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15260-6900 Michael J. Madison Brett M. Frischmann Katherine J. Strandburg Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] This paper can be downloaded without charge from the Social Science Research Network Electronic Paper Collection: http://ssrn.com/abstract=3300348 Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3300348 Knowledge Commons Michael J. Madison,* Brett M. Frischmann,** and Katherine J. Strandburg*** Forthcoming in Hudson, Blake, Rosenbloom, Jonathan, and Cole, Dan eds. Routledge Handbook of the Study of the Commons Abingdon, UK: Routledge. Draft of 31 August 2017 Abstract This chapter provides an introduction to and overview of the knowledge commons research framework. Knowledge commons refers to an institutional approach (commons) to governing the production, use, management, and/or preservation of a particular type of resource (knowledge). The research framework supplies a template for interrogating the details of knowledge commons institutions on a case study basis, generating qualitative data that may be used to support comparative analysis. I. Introduction This chapter provides an introduction to and overview of the knowledge commons research framework. Knowledge commons refers to an institutional approach (commons) to governing the production, use, management, and/or preservation of a particular type of resource (knowledge).
  • Introductory Lecture & FLOSS

    Introductory Lecture & FLOSS

    Introductory Lecture & FLOSS Lecture 1 TU Wien, 193.067 Free and Open Technologies (WS 2019/2020) Christoph Derndorfer and Lukas F. Lang This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. Introduction Organization ● Lectures: ○ Weekly lecture to cover course materials (until Christmas) ○ Lectures take place on Tuesdays, 17:00–19:00, Argentinierstraße 8, Seminarraum/Bibliothek 194-05 ○ Attendance is mandatory ● Group project: ○ In groups of 4 students ○ 3 meetings with lecturers during the semester (week 44/2019, week 48/2019, week 2/2020) ○ Final presentations at the end of January (week 4/2020) ● Final paper: ○ In groups of 2 students ○ Final presentations at the end of January (week 5/2020) ○ Deadline: Sunday, February 9, 2020, 23:59 CET (no exceptions!) Organization ● Grading: ○ 50% group project ○ 35% seminar paper ○ 15% participation during lectures ○ All course components need to be passed in order to pass the overall course! ● Course materials: ○ Will be provided at https://free-and-open-technologies.github.io ● For further questions: ○ Email [email protected] and [email protected] Lecture outline 1. FLOSS (Free/Libre and Open Source Software) 2. Open Hardware 3. Open Data 4. Open Content/Open Educational Resources 5. Open Science/Research 6. Open Access 7. Open Spaces/Open Practices: Metalab Vienna 8. Guest Lecture: Stefanie Wuschitz (Mz* Baltazar’s Lab) Group project ● Goal: ○ Extend, contribute to, or create a new open project within scope of lecture topics ● Choose topic from a list (see course website) or (even better) suggest your own: ○ Groups of 4 students ○ Send a 1-page proposal until Friday, October 25, via email to both lecturers ■ Define the idea, goal, (potential) impact, requirements, and estimated effort ■ State deliverables (should be broken down into three milestones to discuss in meetings) ● Requirements: ○ Open and accessible (Git repository, openly licensed) → others can access/use/study/extend ○ Use time sheet to track and compare estimated vs.