npub12znh2qvaf0w4sm83s4500prwdw05gkmrpg48ea8xcf9jmd4slx6qmrz0zw (npub12zn…z0zw) We also need organizations/associations/foundations to set the definitions, just recently there was a news of a company calling their software open source, which was not, so people call it out and they could do it because there is a definition. If we compare FLOSS to Open Access, we see there is no foundation/organization/association and no specific license, this means we have different definitions of OA, the common characteristic being the gratis one (yes, it was a mistake). So we get these weird situations where we can have a OA paper (just gratis) where we can't do anything with it beyond fair use/exceptions (like a full copyright work) and a non-OA paper with a CC BY because it's being sold. Worse than that, we can have exactly the same paper bot OA and non-OA, for instance a CC BY that's being sold in a website and gratis in another. It's insane.
Of course, organizations must have elections and transparent decision processes to make them do the right thing.
Yes, let's refrain from creating heroes, but let's not kill organizations in the process. F/LOSS and F/LOSS culture (OA, CC, Public Domain) are always being attacked (because abundance), and without organizations we wouldn't stand a chance. 2/2
paulasimoes /
npub1vj…c80gr
2024-10-21 08:08:52
in reply to nevent1q…p9sg
Author Public Key
npub1vjnw3n5ccyekg94c86a4794pzn5t5fwtsufl7p3wctr2fxfhtnhsgc80grPublished at
2024-10-21 08:08:52Event JSON
{
"id": "96b2aa5294c2094adcf88b2f9065eef9085a1abc9041ededfcc877bb7d45702d",
"pubkey": "64a6e8ce98c1336416b83ebb5f16a114e8ba25cb8713ff062ec2c6a499375cef",
"created_at": 1729498132,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"p",
"50a775019d4bdd586cf18568f7846e6b9f445b630a2a7cf4e6c24b2db6b0f9b4",
"wss://relay.mostr.pub"
],
[
"p",
"b7471ee072dd4baed58f0ae76edb7f1f85ae8662e143887b50f8648e8d9e0825",
"wss://relay.mostr.pub"
],
[
"e",
"5c05477960aee7f8a34e5c94bc650520ecdf8c3fde3b7dade71bc7181397cd5b",
"wss://relay.mostr.pub",
"reply"
],
[
"proxy",
"https://ciberlandia.pt/users/paulasimoes/statuses/113344389585827727",
"activitypub"
]
],
"content": "nostr:npub12znh2qvaf0w4sm83s4500prwdw05gkmrpg48ea8xcf9jmd4slx6qmrz0zw We also need organizations/associations/foundations to set the definitions, just recently there was a news of a company calling their software open source, which was not, so people call it out and they could do it because there is a definition. If we compare FLOSS to Open Access, we see there is no foundation/organization/association and no specific license, this means we have different definitions of OA, the common characteristic being the gratis one (yes, it was a mistake). So we get these weird situations where we can have a OA paper (just gratis) where we can't do anything with it beyond fair use/exceptions (like a full copyright work) and a non-OA paper with a CC BY because it's being sold. Worse than that, we can have exactly the same paper bot OA and non-OA, for instance a CC BY that's being sold in a website and gratis in another. It's insane.\nOf course, organizations must have elections and transparent decision processes to make them do the right thing.\nYes, let's refrain from creating heroes, but let's not kill organizations in the process. F/LOSS and F/LOSS culture (OA, CC, Public Domain) are always being attacked (because abundance), and without organizations we wouldn't stand a chance. 2/2",
"sig": "df3b4b8406113a2580e099f539adea277ec51c4e545fd84c023a9249141acbce5dea6619ce52b1af09b93b886b579fee98e69f6e19293acc63685c9c992c3485"
}