3 ms·
Here's a different perspective. For context, I don't write much general-purpose software, but I am writing one or two free/open textbooks[1,2] (for statistics/
by pseut 13y ago
Here's a different perspective. For context, I don't write much general-purpose software, but I am writing one or two free/open textbooks[1,2] (for statistics/econometrics) and I've thought a lot about how they should be licensed. I think the issues are similar.
My biggest concern in this project is "abandonment." There are lots of fantastic books that have since been abandoned by their authors and are no longer suitable to assign for a class---sometimes the author died, sometimes they moved onto other projects; a few key chapters might still be relevant, but I can't expect students to buy 9 different textbooks and read one or two chapters from each one. There are even completely free textbooks (Bruce Hansen, an extremely well-respected econometrician, has one[3]), lots of teachers have online lecture notes that are quite good, some of the stuff on MIT's OCW are excellent, etc. But I don't know what anyone's plans are for maintaining those resources, what direction they plan to go, whether they will keep them free in the future, and so on.
What I'd really like to do is be able to maintain my own copy of this material so that I can continue to add to it if the original author loses interest, correct typos, etc. For most of these books that's impossible because they aren't licensed for that (even if the book is out of print). But even for Creative Commons books it's not feasible, because they only distribute the pdf. If you look at Hansen's book (link below; it's not CC, but it's representative of the material), you'll see that there's a lot of math in these books, so backing out a human editable version of the text from the binary would be a lot of work.
So, I think that there should be free textbooks and I know that textbook projects are often abandoned (or eventually made non-free) by their authors. So it's pretty clear to me that the best way to have there be free textbooks is to write one (unfortunately, since it's a lot of work, but I do have lecture notes from when I've taught these classes as a starting point) and to use a license that entitles anyone who gets a copy of the book to also have a version they can edit and maintain. The GNU Free Documentation License[4] is the only license I know of that does it (it's the GPL of documentation), so I chose it instead of any of the CC licenses.
The FDL is more burdensome than I need it to be; if someone prints out a chapter of the book and hands it out to his or her class, I don't really need every student to get a printed version of the FDL (I'm fine with the professor just telling them about the FDL), but on balance I think the license makes the project stronger. No one needs to worry that I'll abandon or derail these books, because the license guarantees that they can fork them (no matter how they originally got a copy of the books).
I don't think that people who use CC licenses for educational material are unprincipled. Even though I think that the FDL is a better for projects like mine, it's great that they're making the material widely available (even if I worry that it will eventually be abandoned, the fact that I can redistribute their binaries is very nice); and I definitely don't see why they'd think that I'm greedy for choosing the FDL.
[1] http://www.econometricslibrary.org http://www.econometricslibrary.org
[2] https://github.com/EconometricsLibrary https://github.com/EconometricsLibrary
[3] http://www.ssc.wisc.edu/~bhansen/econometrics/ http://www.ssc.wisc.edu/~bhansen/econometrics/
[4] http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html
- foobarbazqux 13y agoBut what's wrong with distributing the source material used to generate the pdf along with the pdf, for CC-licensed material? This is an option.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- pseut 13y agoIt's a fine option, but over, say, 30 years (well within the lifespan of a good textbook if it's getting updates) there are likely to be copies of the book that aren't accompanied with the source code. Especially for books where instructors might want to make printed copies available (less so for my books, but definitely a possibility for textbooks for 300 student introductory classes). IMO the FDL makes that scenario less likely and so strengthens the project which is worth the added inconvenience of the license. The FDL also allows commercial use and textbooks can be expensive; I think it's likely that a publisher would try to bundle or repackage a free book if they could make money off it, and I don't think they're too likely to make it obvious that the book could be downloaded for free unless they're required to. CC NonCommercial would be less free than the FDL; I don't mind someone else making money off the books per se (especially if they are providing real value, but even if they're not), but a lot of the strategies that many textbook publishers use to generate revenue don't serve students very well and would weaken the project. Like I said, I appreciate the effort put out by people making educational material CC, and I appreciate it even more if they make the source available. But for this type of project I think the source being available is the most important thing so I've chosen a license that makes it mandatory. For other projects I might decide differently.
- foobarbazqux 13y agoI think for physical books it's much easier to make money with a copyleft license, so it does weaken the argument for allowing closed source books. I would still personally choose a permissive CC equivalent of a BSD license though (CC BY 3.0), if only because I want other people writing books with permissive CC licenses to be able to incorporate my material. Also, for a closed textbook, a publisher might want to take a couple chapters out of my book, or 10 of the images, and I'm not okay with limiting the amount of quoting.