To whom it may concern,

For some time now, I have been trying to make contact with whoever is administrating lists.ibiblio.org. The Wikipedia article for Ibiblio says:

“It is run by the School of Information and Library Science and the School of Journalism and Mass Communication at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, with partners including the Center for the Public Domain, IBM, and SourceForge.”

So I am writing to each of these organizations about this. If your organization is no longer involved with the Ibiblio project, it might be a good idea to update this article. Otherwise, I would really appreciate it if you could pass on this message to the appropriate person, or at least to someone who is involved in the day-to-day operations of Ibiblio.org, whether in an organizational or technical capacity.

The problem I’m struggling with, is that I have been receiving ever increasing floods of spam via the mailserver at lists.ibiblio.org. A number of years ago, I was a list admin for a mailing list (cc-nz) hosted at lists.ibiblio.org. I am no longer in this role, and in fact this list is no longer in use, having been moved to a new host some years back by the organization using it. However, my email address is still listed as an admin on the list information pages at lists.ibiblio.org, and I still receive any email sent to the admin address for the cc-nz list.

I have done everything I can think of to make contact with the sysadmins in charge of these listservers and mailservers. I have pored over all the pages accessible from the lists.ibiblio.org domain, and tried sending email to every address there that might direct mail to an admin. I have tried joining any lists that seem to be used for admin communication. All with no success. I have tried looking for admin contact information on ibiblio.org, with no success. I have tried answers.ibiblio.org, but I was unable to sign up for an account, or login with any of the other login mechanisms (OpenID, WordPress etc), so I couldn’t ask a question there.

If you have any idea who is in currently charge of the services hosted at ibiblio.org and its subdomains, can you please ask them to make contact with me. Also, you might suggest that they take steps to update these services, so that anyone struggling with similar issues with Ibiblio don’t have to go on an epic quest to find a human to talk to about them.

Warm regards,

Danyl Strype

Filed December 11th, 2018 under free culture

Update 2018-12-11: I corrected “Project Lead” to “Public Lead”, which was the formal title used by CreativeCommons for the non-legal coordinators of local “porting” and advocacy projects, and while I was at it I decided it was remiss of me not to mention NZ GOAL, so I added a mention.

—————–

In June, while I was preoccupied with preparations to travel to London for the Open 2018 conference on Platform Cooperativism, a significant announcement flew under my rader. The team running what was CreativeCommons Aotearoa/ New Zealand (CCANZ) have announced that “Tohatoha” is the new name for the organization. Tohatoha is the word for “sharing” in Te Reo Māori, the indigenous language of Aotearoa.

It’s now common for public organizations in Aotearoa to have a Te Reo Māori name, as well as an English name, in recognition of the bicultural origins of our country. I’ve long advocated for the organization that promotes the CreativeCommons licenses in Aotearoa to follow this convention. But I remember suggesting some words in Te Reo as potential names in the early years of the project, and being reminded by the first CC ANZ Public Lead (2007-2010), Dr Brian Opie, that it’s more culturally appropriate if such a name is gifted, rather than simply chosen. Now that I’ve caught up with the renaming news, I’m curious to learn more about the origins of the new name. 

For more than a decade now, CCANZ has served as the formal hub in Aotearoa/ NZ for a range of work supporting and promoting the use of the CreativeCommons licensing framework. It emerged from a network of free culture, open access, open source, and open government activists, which I helped to prepare the ground for in early 2006, beginning with the establishment of the cc-nz email list on Ibiblio.org (now hosted by OnlineGroups.net).

The first major projects as CCANZ were establishing the creativecommons.org.nz website (now tohatoha.org.nz), which went live in July 2007, and recruiting and overseeing the legal team drafting the NZ “ports” of the CC licenses, formally launched in October of that year. These projects were coordinated by Dr Opie under the umbrella of Te Whāinga Aronui, the Council for the Humanities (which later became part of the Royal Society of NZ). Perhaps the most significant achievement of this period was the formalization of the NZ GOAL (Government Open Access and Licensing) framework, approved in July, 2010 by Cabinet, the executive body of the NZ Government (the NZ Goal Software Extension came later, in 2016). Subsequent Public Leads, Jane Hornibrook, Matt McGregor, and Mandy Henk (now Chief Executive of Tohatoha), have overseen a number of changes of Hosting Institution, first to the Royal Society, after Te Whāinga Aronui decided to merge with it, then to the Open Educational Resources Foundation, and now to being an independent entity (thus the new name).

Prior to the recent announcements, there had been very little public comment from anyone involved in CC ANZ since the announcements in November 2017 of a new strategic plan, and a 10th birthday party. The cc-nz list and the CC ANZ Loomio group (neither of which have yet been updated to reflect the name), have been quiet since the end of last year too. The only information on the rebranded website about how to get involved is a webform where visitors can submit an indication of interested in a special meeting to take place in 2018, but there is no information about when it is, or if it already took place. If there is still an active community of kiwi CC advocates, it’s a bit unclear how, or where, interested people can join the discussions.

But after years of supporting CCANZ, I’m aware that behind the publicly-available information that makes up the visible part of the iceberg, there is always a huge amount of hard work going on beneath the water line. Reading between the lines, it looks like the release of the strategic plan was followed by a lot of work to secure funding, to recruit and orientate the new staff members, and to carry out the re-organization and rebranding that the transition to self-hosting as Tohatoha required. Now that this work is complete, I look forward to seeing a revitalization of CC advocacy work in Aotearoa.

For the first time in a few years, two new case studies on local CC use have appeared on the website. One is on Isa Pearl Ritchie’s novel ‘Fishing for Maui’ (licensed CC BY-NC 4.0), and one on Siobhan Leachman’s citizen science work with “Wikimedia, the Biodiversity Heritage Library and the USA-based Smithsonian Institution”, both posted in the last few months. Hopefully this is a sign of things to come.

Filed December 3rd, 2018 under free culture

Update 2018-12-19: More good news from the Free Music Archive, they report they will resume normal transmission in the new year, after getting themselves acquired by a camera rental platform called KitSplit. Kudos to the KitSplit crew for stepping in to keep the FMA alive. In related good news,  the crew of the federated audio-hosting app FunkWhale have also imported a large chunk of the FMA collection into a music library at open.audio, by copying from the FMA mirror at Archive.org.

———————————-

The Free Music Archive is facing a funding crisis, and at this point, will be shutting down on Dec 1. If you, or your organization, can help keep the FMA alive, please contact them today! While their full collection and an archive of the site will be available on Archive.org, it would be a real shame if the live site, and its community of curators, was lost to the web.

Why are online institutions like the Free Music Archive important? Because they are (ideally) an enduring public record of the work created by musicians who choose a more permissive style of copyright licensing for a wide range of reasons, and often with a level of commercial success that some people may find surprising.

———————————-

Update 2018-11-30:  Some good news from the folks at the Free Music Archive. Details are sketchy, but what they can tell us for now is that the site will *not* go down on Dec 1. Uploads are still suspended for now, and their collection is still being mirrored at Archive.org, which is good anyway. Watch this space.

Filed November 27th, 2018 under free culture

 PeerTube is a revolutionary new video hosting system created by a developer known as Chocobozzz.  Supported and funded by Framasoft, a French organization working on a project to  “de-Googlify the Internet“, PeerTube (as the name suggests) has been created as a potential replacement for YouTube and you can watch the intro video here, streamed from a PeerTube site. Excited software freedom geeks have been testing experimental versions of PeerTube for a couple of years now, and there are dozens of groups and individuals running PeerTube sites (or “instances”). In October of 2018, Framasoft proudly announced the release of PeerTube 1.0.

Finally, the wait is over, and PeerTube is ready for average users to dive in. But what what makes PeerTube different from existing independent video sites like EngageMedia or BitChute? First, a little background.

Since it first became possible to embed video files in websites, it’s always been risky to host your own videos on your own website. The reason is that even short video files are much, much bigger than text or image files, or even audio files. If your video goes viral, and you have hundreds or thousands of users trying to stream or download the video at once, you end up having to pay huge fees for the bandwidth that uses on your server, or even having your website break down completely because of the traffic jam.

For years, this has created a paradox where creators who publish their own video, or small, community-hosted video sites, get nowhere if none of their videos get attention, and get punished if any of the videos they host get too popular. Either way, they lose. This is why, with the exception of a few determined anti-corporate activists and free code hackers, most people host their video on a handful of giant, corporate-controlled hosts like YouTube and Vimeo.

What makes PeerTube sites different from other independent video sites like EngageMedia or BitChute is not the type of video they host, nor their moderation policies, but the way they all interconnect (or “federate”) with each other. Using new technologies like WebTorrent and ActivityPub (more on them later), PeerTube sites automatically combine their hosting power to form a federated, video-hosting network. Working together, they can compete with corporate video-hosting platforms like YouTube, something no independent site, and certainly no independent video producer, can afford to do alone.

Today, I started a project of reaching out to independent video producers to make sure they know about PeerTube and the fediverse it’s a part of, encourage them to make use of these tools, and offer support to help them do so. Here’s a generic version of the text I wrote, in case it’s useful to anyone wanting to do something similar.

“Great to see work you’re doing in independent film-making.

I note that your contact page links to a number of corporate-controlled media platforms (FarceBook, TheirsTube etc). Have you heard about the ‘fediverse’, the federated replacements for these centralized platforms, using free code (or “open source”) software? For example, there are a number of inter-connected micro-blogging networks that offer a replacement for the birdsite, including GNU Social, Mastodon, Pleroma, and Misskey, and users on any of the thousands of independent sites running any of these software packages can all communicate with one another, not just the users on their site (or “instance”).

Even more relevant to your work, is PeerTube, a network of video-hosting sites that are similarly inter-connected with each other. PeerTube sites use WebTorrent to allow users watching videos to help serve them to other viewers, reducing the bandwith load on the host if a video goes viral, and making it viable for organizations to host their own video directly. PeerTube sites also use inter-connect with the rest of the fediverse, allowing users to follow PeerTube channels, watch embedded videos, and comment on them, all from within their social media client.

If you need any help figuring out how these technologies could help you organize, promote, and distribute your work, please feel free to get in touch.”

Filed November 27th, 2018 under independent media, free software

My apologies to my three readers, and to the hard working organizers from The Open Coop, for not getting around to a write-up on Open 2018 yet. One positive outcome from that event is that attendees who are working on ‘Open App Ecosystems’ of various kinds were able to compare notes, and as a result, there has been a wave of new members and activity on the OAE Loomio group. Open 2018 was a fantastic event, and I encourage anyone interested in potential collaborations between the software freedom movement and the cooperative movement to attend in 2019.

I will soon be heading to Hong Kong for another platform cooperativism conference, ‘Sowing the Seeds‘, taking place from 28-29 September at the Chinese University of Hong Kong (CUHK). This event is a collaboration between a number of cooperatives from around Asia, and the Platform Cooperativism Consortium, based at The New School at NYU (New York University). I’m also hoping to attend the cooperative hackathon taking place over two days before the conference (watch this space!).

A number of the speakers and participants at this conference were contributors to ‘Ours to Hack and Own‘, a book of essays that attempt to map out the transition from data farms that benefit corporations and investors, to digital cafes that benefits their members and workers. It’s a great book, and while I encourage you to buy a copy if you can afford to, I’m aware of at least one place you can download a gratis digital copy (see our Notable Books library).

It’s a privilege to be able to attend these events, and learn more about the fantastic work being done by cooperative organizers and free code hackers around the world. At the same time, it’s taking some effort to get my head around this new social movement, and how it relates to the pre-existing economic democracy and digital freedom movements that I’ve been involved in for decades. Expect to see more writing on this blog about both the organization and technical aspects of platform cooperatives over the next year or so. It may be that some of this writing will provide the ending I’ve been looking for to complete the story I want to tell in ‘Email At My Life‘. Again, watch this space!

Filed September 23rd, 2018 under News, open source

According to a piece on left-leaning kiwi blog site The Daily Blog, there’s more bad news looming for basic democratic rights. Both the Australian and New Zealand governments are considering passing new laws that would force people to hand over the keys to their encrypted communications. NZ already has some stupidly strict laws on “exporting” anything encryption-related from the country, and even publishing articles about it in academic journals requires special permission. A coalition of digital liberties groups, including InternetNZ and the NZ Council for Civil Liberties, has been defending the right to encrypt since at least 2016. A time when the debate over the technology was heating up around the world, thanks to the work of groups like Access Now. Back then, the Obama administration were saying that the US federal government would not be doing anything that weakened the digital security provided by encryption.

The problem is, encrypted communication is such an obscure thing for most people, and so far from their everyday concerns about paying the rent, keep dinner on the table, keeping the shop open, or whatever. There’s a risk that too many people will only understand why this matters too late, and start trying to close the stable door after the horse has bolted. So here’s a simple way to explain it.

You have a lock box in your house. In it, you might keep some cash for emergencies. You might keep important documents like your passport when you’re not travelling, or copies of your will, or a copy of your research on your family history. You might keep something harmless but embarrassing, like some saucy Polaroid photos you took with your lover, or something weird and sentimental, like a lace doily, or half a doughnut. It’s nobody else’s business what’s in that box. You have a fundamental right to keep it private. It’s a right that’s asserted in a bunch of other human rights conventions, including Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

“No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.”

You don’t want anyone to see what’s in your lock box, but let’s say law enforcement officers want the key to it, because they believe it contains evidence of a crime. Traditionally, in democratic countries, the officers have to appear before a neutral third-party (like a judge) and the onus is on them to convince that person that they have a very good reason to be allowed to violate your privacy, not on you to prove that they don’t (”nothing to hide …”).

If they get permission - in the form of a judicial warrant - it only applies in this specific case, to you, to the private property they’re asking the judge for access to, in this case your lock box, and for a specific period of time. They can’t get a warrant to search anyone’s lock box. They can’t get a warrant to search anything you choose to keep private. They can’t get a warrant to violate your privacy any time they like from now on. A warrant is a temporary, specific exemption to the laws that normally protect your privacy. If law enforcement officers can just ask you for the key to your lock box, and threaten to arrest you and charge with obstruction if you say no, that’s “arbitrary interference” in your “privacy, home or correspondence”, and Article 12 says that’s something governments that respect human rights protect their people from.

An encryption key is like a digital version of the key to your lock box. Like your email or social media passphrase, it protects things you have reasons to want to keep private. In a tiny minority of cases, that might be communications about committing a crime. But in the majority of cases, they will be things you want to keep private because they are embarrassing (dick pics), or personal (love letters), or financially sensitive (online banking), or its your professional duty  (a doctor’s database of their patients’ medical records). Things that are harmless. Things that could even be harmful to people if their privacy is violated, like medical insurance companies getting access to people’s medical records, and charging higher premiums to people with unusual health problems, even though the whole point of insurance is to collect money off lots of people, so it can be paid out to those who need it.

The problem with the laws being discussed about encryption is not that they let law enforcement violate a specific person’s privacy, in specific ways, when they have good reason to think they will find evidence of a crime. The law already allows them to apply for a warrant for that. The problem is, these laws would let them search through anything that anyone chose to encrypt, any time they like. It would let them do so in secret, with no effective way for the public to hold them accountable for how they use those powers.

This is how policing works in a police state, not a democracy. Please contact your political representatives and urge them to do everything in their power to protect our privacy, by protecting our right to encrypt.

Filed September 7th, 2018 under News, security

At the end of last month, Mozilla Hacks announced a new series of “DWeb” posts on decentralized software projects, which aim to redistribute the power to host and share information on the web, and on the internet in general. Obviously it’s of great interest to Disintermedia, and this blog’s 2 readers. So far, there are articles on Scuttlebutt/ SSB, WebTorrent, and Beaker Browser (see the list at the end of the DWeb announcement article). Thanks to the fedizen - a citizen of the “fediverse” of federated social networks -  who brought this to my attention, sorry I can’t remember who it was right now.

I’m back in the studio, and intending to resume normal transmission next week. This will start with a run-down of the talks and workshops I attended at Open 2018 in London.

In late July, I will be attending the Open 2018 conference in London, thanks to the encouragement of one of the organizers, who participates in the Open App Ecosystem (OAE) group on Loomio. If you’re going to be there, let me know, and I’ll do my best to make sure you know about any open space sessions that might interest you. Hopefully we’ll have open space time for folks interested in the OAE and the Collaborative Technology Alliance reboot to get together, as well as a session for those who orbit the Peer-to-Peer Foundation and the Commons Transition project.

I’ll be in London for a week or so before the conference, so if you’re not going to be at the conference, but you are based somewhere around the greater London area, feel free to get in touch. I love to meet up with a diverse range of people when I travel, and geek out about the potential for the net and digital technology to better serve human and environmental needs.

I’ve got a lot of blog posts in the pipeline, but this will probably be my last post until after the conference, and maybe even until I get back to the studio. I will do my best to post some live updates from the conference using my new fediverse account (thanks to the NZ Open Source Society), and possibly some kind of Etherpad or CryptPad for live note-taking.

Filed July 4th, 2018 under Uncategorized

In the late 90s and early 2000s, there was a wave of radical community servers, many of which fed into (or grew out of), the Indymedia network. Most of those veterans have sadly vanished from the web, and RiseUp, Framasoft, Comunes (OurProject), and CoActivate, are among the few still standing. As awareness grows of tech corporations like Microsoft, Apple, Google, FarceBook, and Amazon, putting their users in a digital cage, it’s great to see a whole new wave of cooperative groups coming together to replace these Web 2.0 prison canteens with ‘digital cafes’, like CommonsCloud, Disroot, and Social.coop, which I’m starting to get involved with.

A digital cafe (or ‘Open App Ecosystem‘) is a community of users and hackers providing themselves and each other with web services like social media (social networking, open publishing, or both), and sharing the costs. Since they’re doing many of the same things, rather than reinventing the wheel by writing all their software from scratch, they use a range of free code software developed by other groups. Sometimes they donate towards the financial costs of the peer production project that develops the software they use, and in other cases they have the skills and the time to contribute back to the project.

Social.coop began as group of members who set up a cooperative to share the costs of a site running Mastodon, a federated microblog server. Social.coop users can interact not only with each other, and with users on other sites running Mastodon (”instances”), but they can also interact with users on any site connected to a larger “fediverse” of federated social apps. The software makes these interactions across the fediverse possible by using common standards for exchanging data between social sites, initially using an older standard called OStatus. More recently a new standard called ActivityPub was published by the W3C (World Wide Web Consortium), the body that maintains the official standards for HTML, and everything else about how the web works under the hood. ActivityPub was the final output of W3C’s Social Working Group, which has now been replaced by the SocialCG (Social Web Incubator Community Group).

Social.coop depends on the work of all these other organizations in different ways, to keep their digital cafe running. But what’s the nature of the relationship between a cooperative running a digital cafe, and the groups maintaining the software they use? Does their sustainability depend more on making sure the project developing Mastodon has good governance? Or working on ensuring the reliability of their own servers, tweaking the software to serve member’s specific needs better, and perhaps adding new services, to help attract more members who can help reduce the costs per member?

You can’t have a cafe without a reliable electric and gas supply to the kitchen (the “back-end” of the server that users don’t see), and good mood lighting so people can feel relaxed but still see what they’re doing (UI or “User Interface“). But you don’t build a successful cooperative cafe by focusing on the internal politics of the energy utility, or the lamp shop. You focus on building your membership / customer base (users), and your collective capacity to provide them with good coffee, good service, and good food (UX or “User eXperience“).

If your energy supply becomes unreliable, you switch providers. If a coop-owned energy supplier emerges, great, switch to that. #ForkOffTogether could be that, and if people want to pitch that to them, go for it. But we can’t say for certain exactly which software they’re going to fork yet. Pleroma and Hubzilla are already options for ActivityPub server. Of these two existing, ready-to-use ActivityPub servers, I would say Hubzilla’s community probably has the closest overlap of values with social.coop. IMHO both their back-ends perform better than Mastodon’s Ruby-on-Rails engine, but other options continue to emerge (like Pylodon).

It’s the same with the lamp shop (UI). At present social.coop happens to be buying energy and lamps as a bundled package from Mastodon. But we’re not stuck with either, and we don’t have to get them from the same supplier at all. There are already a bunch of other lamp shops around, whose lamps can plug into the same power sockets (server-to-client API) that Mastodon uses. These include Pinafore (which I’m using these days and loving), and Halcyon, which is modeled directly on the look and feel of the birdsite, so fediverse sites who use that will have the minimum transition pain for refugees from there. Other lamp shops will emerge, and some of the existing shops whose lamps use different power sockets (eg Qvitter) might become compatible in the future. Hopefully, in a year or two, everyone will be using the same power sockets and plug standard (ActivityPub server-to-client API), so all lamps will work with all electric suppliers.

In a digital cafe, the energy supply is the maintenance crew’s problem (tech working group). As long as the lights stay on, the rest of the members don’t have to care about how they’re powered. The lamp situation, on the other hand, is something the members/ customers have to put up with while they drink their coffee. Decisions about which UI options social.coop offers need to be made by the membership, within the range of options that can technically work right now. Keep in mind that members can also get takeaway coffee (using a portal like pinafore.social to connect to their current instance), so they do have lighting options beyond what the tech group can set up and maintain right now.

The most important thing, the thing that *isn’t* a distraction, ever, is the coffee, the service, and the food. If we don’t get the UX right, it doesn’t matter how health or unhealthy the workplace is down at the energy company or the lamp shop, because we won’t keep the digital doors open long enough for their long term survival to matter. I love to geek out on organizational structures too. I get it. If that’s your thing, by all means go help the #ForkOffTogether folks become a cooperative energy supplier that social.coop can buy from (if they’re reliable suppliers). I totally endorse that.

Clear as mud? I may have over-extended the cafe metaphor somewhat, and as the old saying goes, no metaphor bears close examination. Feel free to hit me up about what I mean by this or that on the fediverse.

Filed June 12th, 2018 under open social networks, free software

Two years ago, Nadia Eghbal published a blog piece about how she hates the term “open source”, and not for the usual reasons; the way it misses the point of software freedom, emphasizing corporations’ freedoms to use the work of the free code community without reciprocity, instead of peoples’ freedoms to modify and share the software they use. Instead, her argument is that “open source”, as defined by the Open Source Initiative, is too specific and exclusive, and proposes that we start using a vaguer and more inclusive term like “public software”.

In that piece, she pulled a quote from another blog post by Mike Perham of Sidekiq, stripping it from the context of what Mike is arguing, and giving the initial impression that he is saying something totally different (and arguably incorrect). Upon reading Mike’s piece, where says …

“Open Source != Free Software”

… he clearly does not mean that open source software is not Free Software, as defined by the Free Software Definition (“libre” or “free-as-in-speech”). What he is saying is that open source software does not have to be free-of-charge (“gratis” or “free-as-in-beer”). Being gratis is not a requirement for being Free Software either:

“we encourage people who redistribute free software to charge as much as they wish or can. If a license does not permit users to make copies and sell them, it is a nonfree license.”

The two different meanings the word “free” has in English have always caused confusion, and this was probably the main reason the phrase “open source” took off in the Anglophone world (speakers of French and Spanish always know which meaning of “free” they’re using because they have words like libre and gratis). But the software freedom movement has always been concerned with finding ways to pay people to work on free code software. A recent example is the talk by Denver of JMP at LibrePlanet 2018 about Free Software business models.

The open source movement, on the other hand, was founded by people whose goal was to get people working on free code software paid for by corporations, entities that are highly allergic to concepts like “freedom”, “sharing”, and “cooperation”. The open source movement has been very successful with this, but with the consequence that most of that free code consists of back-end libraries under non-copyleft licenses (“MIT”, “BSD”, Apache 2.0 etc) which corporations then use to make proprietary apps for end users (including GitHub).

In his piece, what Mike recommends is licensing your code under a strong copyleft license (eg GNU AGPL), then selling exceptions to companies who don’t want to comply with the copyleft obligations of that license, like X-wiki Labs do with software like Cryptpad. Where this means a company is using and funding free code under a copyleft license, where they otherwise would have been using and funding proprietary software, this seems like good strategy. But this is more of an argument for using copyleft licenses than it is an argument for watering down or replacing the term “open source”.

If you’re looking for a more general term for collaborative work to create a common good, which is what people usually mean when they say “open source” outside of software (like Open Source Ecology, OpenStreetMap, WikiHouse, and WikiSpeed), I suggest “peer production”. If you need a term for people dumping their “IP” into an unstewarded commons, using something like CC Zero or the WTFPL, I think “public domain” does the job nicely. Perhaps there needs to be another term for things like Tesla offering free licenses for their electric car patents, because while this was a public-spirited offer, it is not “open source” by either common definition of the term (free code or peer production).

But I honestly don’t understand what purpose Nadia wants a term like “public software” to serve. How does it help anyone to fudge free code (open source/ Free Software/ FOSS/ FLOSS) together with “shared source” (you can see it but not use it), and “fair source” (basically shareware), and code placed in the public domain, and unlicensed code (which defaults to ARR copyright in the US and most jurisdictions), and arguably inappropriate use of CC licenses for code (to create proprietary freeware), as if these are all the same thing? Because whatever the motivations behind them, these approaches have very different consequences.

Filed May 30th, 2018 under Uncategorized
« Previous PageNext Page »
  • Annual Events

  • Digital Freedom Foundation
  • LibrePlanet
  • Aotearoa

  • Aotearoa Indymedia
  • BallaNZ
  • Creative Commons Aotearoa/ NZ
  • Creative Freedom Foundation
  • DigitalNZ
  • Enspiral
  • Fair Deal Coalition
  • GreenStage
  • InternetNZ
  • Island Bay World Service
  • Living Economies
  • Localise
  • Loomio
  • Matrix FM
  • Nicky Hagar
  • No Right Turn
  • NZ Council for Civil Liberties
  • NZ Makers
  • NZ Makers Map
  • NZ Māori Internet Society
  • NZ Open Source Awards
  • NZCommons
  • OASIS
  • Open Government Ninjas of NZ
  • Open Source Society of NZ
  • Open Standards NZ
  • Open Ur Eyes
  • Pacific Media Centre
  • Permaculture in NZ
  • PledgeMe
  • Radio Chomsky
  • Regulation
  • Scoop
  • Tech Liberty
  • Timebank Aotearoa
  • Transition Towns Aotearoa/ NZ
  • Uncensored Magazine
  • Waatea News
  • Waikato Linux Users Group
  • What If
  • Wiki NZ
  • Zenbu
  • archives

  • ArchiveTeam
  • Critical Commons
  • Ibiblio
  • Internet Archive Community Software Collection
  • Open Archives Initiative
  • Blogroll

  • Abject
  • Access Now
  • Ars Technica
  • BadScience
  • Banjo - RoboBlog
  • Boing Boing
  • Born out of Binary
  • Centre for Media and Democracy
  • Choke Point Project
  • Copyrighteous
  • Create Digital Music
  • Creative Commons International
  • Cryptogon
  • Digital Standards Organisations
  • Disinfo
  • E-Democracy
  • Electronic Privacy Information Center
  • Ever Vigilant
  • Freedom Box Foundation
  • Freedom of the Press Foundation
  • Gaming On Linux
  • Global Indymedia
  • Gondwanaland (Mike Linksvayer)
  • Institute for the Future of the Book
  • Institute of Network Cultures
  • Internet Governance Project
  • InternetNZ
  • Island Bay World Service
  • Iterating Towards Openness
  • Knowledge Ecology International
  • LinkedListCorruption
  • Linuxed - Exploring Linux Distros
  • Localise
  • Moved by Freedom - Powered By Standards
  • Nanowares
  • New Zealand Māori Internet Society
  • Nicky Hagar
  • No Right Turn
  • NZ Council for Civil Liberties
  • NZCommons
  • O'Reilly Radar
  • OASIS
  • OERu Technology Blog
  • Open Educational Resources Foundation
  • Open Knowledge Foundation
  • Open Rights Group
  • Open Social Web
  • Open Source Conscious Intelligence Network
  • Open Source Food
  • Open Stand
  • Open Ur Eyes
  • OpenCollective
  • OpenDotDotDot
  • OpenSource.com
  • Permaculture in NZ
  • Plumi
  • Public Interest Journalism Foundation
  • Punk Rock Permaculture
  • Question Copyright
  • Replicant (OS)
  • Rob Meyers
  • Schneier on Security
  • Scoop
  • Shareable
  • Slashdot
  • Software Freedom Law Centre
  • Software in the Public Interest
  • SourceMap
  • Sustento Institute
  • Tech Liberty
  • TechRights
  • The Tin Hat
  • Tinkering Down Under
  • TorrentFreak
  • TransitionMovement
  • Translation Project
  • Trisquel GNU/ Linux
  • United Diversity
  • Waatea News
  • We Speak for Freedom
  • Why Your Boss is Programmed To Be a Dictator
  • code bank

  • Allura
  • BitBucket
  • FusionForge
  • GITHub
  • GITLab
  • Gogs
  • Internet Archive Community Software Collection
  • LaunchPad
  • NotABug
  • Savannah
  • Software Freedom Conservancy
  • Software Heritage
  • Sourceforge
  • community economics

  • Commons Transition
  • Fruit Tree Planting Foundation
  • In Our Back Yards
  • Institute for Local Self-Reliance
  • Libre-Living
  • Living Economies
  • Sensorica
  • Sustainable Economy Law Centre
  • Timebank Aotearoa
  • TransitionMovement
  • cooperative

  • Loomio
  • Snowdrift Coop
  • crowdfunding

  • ArtistShare
  • BountySource
  • Causes
  • CauseVox
  • Crowdfunder
  • Crowdjustice
  • Crowdrise
  • Crowdsupply
  • Flattr
  • Fundit.buzz
  • GiveaLittle
  • Goteo
  • In Our Back Yards
  • KickStarter
  • KissKissBankBank
  • Liberapay
  • Mighty Cause
  • OpenGift
  • Patreon
  • PledgeMe
  • PledgeMusic
  • Pozible
  • Snowdrift Coop
  • StartSomeGood
  • Taproot Foundation
  • The Working World
  • Tidelift
  • Events

  • IndieWebCamp
  • free code

  • April
  • Black Duck Open Hub
  • DistroWatch
  • Ever Vigilant
  • F-Droid
  • Free Software Directory (GNU FDL 1.3 or later)
  • Free Software Support Network
  • Free Software Support Network
  • Free Your Android
  • FreshCode
  • Gogs
  • Gun.io
  • Internet Archive Community Software Collection
  • LILA
  • LinuxTracker
  • NotABug
  • OERu Technology Blog
  • Peers Community
  • Plumi
  • PublicLab
  • Replicant (OS)
  • Software Heritage
  • Urchn Studios
  • Free Media

  • Communes Collective
  • Copyrighteous
  • Create Digital Music
  • Definition of Free Cultural Works
  • Dyne Foundation
  • FLOSSManuals
  • Free Culture Foundation
  • Ibiblio
  • Librivox
  • LILA
  • Open Video Conference
  • Show Me Do
  • Translation Project
  • Urchn Studios
  • WikiLeaks
  • freelancing

  • BountySource
  • Gun.io
  • independent media

  • Aotearoa Indymedia
  • BallaNZ
  • EngageMedia
  • Freedom of the Press Foundation
  • LILA
  • Matrix FM
  • Pacific Media Centre
  • Public Interest Journalism Foundation
  • Radio Chomsky
  • Radio Heritage Foundation
  • Uncensored Magazine
  • Waatea News
  • libre gaming

  • Gaming On Linux
  • Makers

  • GreenStage
  • Libre-Living
  • Mediamatic
  • NZ Makers
  • NZ Makers Map
  • Open ROV
  • Renewable PCs
  • Rob Meyers
  • Sensorica
  • maps

  • GeoForAll
  • GeoNames
  • Green Map System
  • Map Tools
  • Open Geospatial Foundation
  • Open Street Map
  • open governance

  • Crowdfunding
  • D-Cent
  • Deep Democracy Institute International
  • E-Democracy
  • Fight for the Future
  • Holacracy
  • Internet Governance Project
  • Kettering Foundation
  • Knowledge Sharing Toolkit (CC-BY-SA 3.0)
  • Open Government Ninjas of NZ
  • Open Policy Network
  • Open Space World (CC-BY-SA 2.5)
  • Open Stand
  • Open Standards NZ
  • Participedia
  • Sunlight Foundation
  • Transition Towns Aotearoa/ NZ
  • What If
  • WikiLeaks
  • open hardware

  • H-Node
  • Makey Makey
  • Meeblip Open Source Bass Synth
  • Open Hardware Summit
  • Open ROV
  • Open Source Hardware Association
  • Orgs

  • Access Now
  • Apache Foundation
  • April
  • Autistici/Inventati
  • Collaborative Knowledge Foundation
  • Commons Transition
  • Communes Collective
  • Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility
  • Creative Commons Aotearoa/ NZ
  • Creative Freedom Foundation
  • Critical Commons
  • D-Cent
  • Deep Democracy Institute International
  • Digital Due Process coalition
  • Digital Freedom Foundation
  • Digital Standards Organisations
  • DigitalNZ
  • Dyne Foundation
  • E-Democracy
  • Electronic Frontiers Foundation
  • Electronic Privacy Information Center
  • Fair Tracing Project
  • Fight for the Future
  • Foundation for Peer-to-Peer Alternatives
  • Free Culture Foundation
  • Free Network Foundation
  • Free Software Foundation
  • Free Software Support Network
  • Free Software Support Network
  • Freedom of the Press Foundation
  • Guifi
  • Ibiblio
  • Identity Commons
  • Institute for Local Self-Reliance
  • Internet Engineering Taskforce
  • Internet Governance Project
  • ISA Commons
  • Kettering Foundation
  • LEAP Encryption Access Project
  • LILA
  • Living Economies
  • Loomio
  • May First/ People Link
  • Mediamatic
  • NZ Māori Internet Society
  • NZ Open Source Awards
  • Open Architecture Network
  • Open Archives Initiative
  • Open Geospatial Foundation
  • Open Policy Network
  • Open Source Hardware Association
  • Open Source Society of NZ
  • Open Web Foundation
  • OpenADR Alliance
  • OpenCorporates
  • Outreachy
  • Participatory Culture Foundation
  • Peers Community
  • Permaculture in NZ
  • Privacy International
  • Public Citizen
  • Public Interest Journalism Foundation
  • Public Knowledge
  • Public Patent Foundation
  • Question Copyright
  • Radio Heritage Foundation
  • ReDecentralize
  • Reform Government Surveillance
  • Regulation
  • Rhizome
  • RiseUp
  • Science Commons
  • Software Carpentry Foundation
  • Software Freedom Conservancy
  • Sunlight Foundation
  • Sustainable Economy Law Centre
  • Taproot Foundation
  • Transition Towns Aotearoa/ NZ
  • Waikato Linux Users Group
  • Wiki NZ
  • World Wide Web Consortium (WC3)
  • Xiph.org
  • XMPP Standards Foundation
  • Peer2Peer

  • BitCoin
  • FreeCoin
  • Permaculture

  • Appropedia (CC-BY-SA 3.0)
  • Fruit Tree Planting Foundation
  • Future Scenarios
  • OrganicDesign
  • Permaculture in NZ
  • TransitionMovement
  • We Speak for Freedom
  • Privacy

  • Access Now
  • Digital Due Process coalition
  • Ever Vigilant
  • Fight for the Future
  • International Principles on the Application of Human Rights to Communications Surveillance
  • LEAP Encryption Access Project
  • OASIS
  • Privacy International
  • Reform Government Surveillance
  • What If
  • protocols and licensing

  • Definition of Free Cultural Works
  • Digital Standards Organisations
  • Greenlots
  • ISA Commons
  • Open Archives Initiative
  • Open Stand
  • Open Standards NZ
  • Open Web Foundation
  • OpenADR Alliance
  • Regular Events

  • Libre Graphics Meeting
  • Open Hardware Summit
  • science and datasets

  • AllTrials
  • Collaborative Knowledge Foundation
  • DigitalNZ
  • Fair Tracing Project
  • ISA Commons
  • Open Geospatial Foundation
  • Open Hand Project
  • SourceMap
  • Wiki NZ
  • Zooniverse
  • Tools

  • Autistici/Inventati
  • BitCoin
  • Black Duck Open Hub
  • CoActivate
  • Crowdfunding
  • DistroWatch
  • Dyne Foundation
  • F-Droid
  • FLOSSManuals
  • Fork the Cookbook
  • FreeCoin
  • GITHub
  • GNU Operating System
  • GreenStage
  • H-Node
  • How To Escape the GoogleMax Panopticon
  • Knowledge Sharing Toolkit (CC-BY-SA 3.0)
  • LEAP Encryption Access Project
  • LinuxTracker
  • Loomio
  • Map Tools
  • May First/ People Link
  • Meeblip Open Source Bass Synth
  • Monolith
  • Open Hand Project
  • Open Source Ecology
  • Open Space World (CC-BY-SA 2.5)
  • Open Street Map
  • OpenCorporates
  • OpenMailBox
  • Participatory Culture Foundation
  • Plumi
  • Renewable PCs
  • Replicant (OS)
  • RiseUp
  • Savannah
  • Show Me Do
  • Sourceforge
  • SourceMap
  • TransforMap
  • Translation Project
  • Web Platform
  • Zenbu
  • Transition

  • Green Map System
  • Health After Oil
  • Localise
  • OrganicDesign
  • Wiki

  • Appropedia (CC-BY-SA 3.0)
  • Foundation for Peer-to-Peer Alternatives
  • Instructables
  • LibrePlanet
  • Open (Government) NZ
  • Participedia
  • SourceWatch
  • WikiEducator
  • wireless mesh

  • Guifi
  • workplace democracy

  • Enspiral
  • The Working World