Is OER Legal framework a challenge to a Copyright ethics. – Week 3
When I was doing some HE studies in philosophy and religion I remember a lecture where on an Australian philosopher Peter Singer, who argued that if we remove the concept that life is sacred, many of the problems on difficult ethical discussions of today such as abortion, euthanasia, inequality, climate change etc. will be lifted from our thinking and we can see the problem from a different ethical perspective to maybe find a solution.
For example the decision of euthanasia in a terminal case that it has no hope scientifically can free up the cost of health care to use it for patients who needs it more, it also posits the question of what it means to live as living with tubes down our throats or unconscious is something that makes us humans…
From this lecture, beside the long discussions on the slippery slope that would engulf us if we decided to lift the “Sacred” status to our lives, I took two main points…
Society today is a crossroads with its foundational values, not only on the sanctity of life.
If we lift any fundamental “sacred” value from any problem that we see and discuss on any of today’s problem, the conflict in question seems so much easy to resolve.
To link this idea with the OER and Copyright ethics, here we find that the sacred value is “property” because it means “money and/or power” and despite of many many years of fighting between left and right on this point and without taking any position on either side . I would like to ask what would it happen if “property = copyright» is no sacred anymore then money or power would not be the issue… Or better put we can start thinking of the problem from a complete new perspective, free of the constrains of our societal anchors to law and order.
McAndrew and Farrow (2013) highlight the importance of choosing the “Creative Commons licensing” for the legal working success of Open Learn in terms that all the content used by them is Open (not necessarily free) and to have a much larger impact and I agree with the importance of this selection “in creating a culture of confidence and legal awareness shouldn’t be understated.”
In practicality the innovation of the openness of the content under “creative commons licensing” lift that sanctity of property and augment its share-ability without the hassle of asking permission, but with the hassle of no monetization for any content created! The discussion could take from here as long as all the discussions of the slippery slope of daring to challenge one very pivotal economic peon “Copyright” in a much larger kingdom “Property” and of-course OER impact is at the heart of this challenges and pivotal. It proves that the suspension from certain key values change our perspective of education who should provide it and the benefits and costs in a much complex society.