| | --\begin{flushright}
+ Thatâs the true value of things that are Made with Creative Commons.
+ | Â | | Â | | Â | --\begin{flushright}
\textit{ Ryan Merkley, CEO, Creative Commons}
\end{flushright} |
- This book shows the world how sharing can be good for business—but
+ This book shows the world how sharing can be good for businessâbut
with a twist.
We began the project intending to explore how creators,
@@ -180,14 +180,14 @@
Commons but instead gather fresh ideas and dynamic examples that
spark new, innovative models and help others follow suit by building
on what already works. At the onset, we framed our investigation in
- familiar business terms. We created a blank “open business
- model canvas,” an interactive online tool that would help
+ familiar business terms. We created a blank âopen business
+ model canvas,â an interactive online tool that would help
people design and analyze their business model.
Through the generous funding of Kickstarter backers, we set about
this project first by identifying and selecting a diverse group of
creators, organizations, and businesses who use Creative Commons in
- an integral way—what we call being Made with Creative Commons. We
+ an integral wayâwhat we call being Made with Creative Commons. We
interviewed them and wrote up their stories. We analyzed what we
heard and dug deep into the literature.
@@ -202,15 +202,15 @@
and generating revenue not for unlimited growth but to sustain the
operation.
- They often didn’t like hearing what they do described as an open
+ They often didnât like hearing what they do described as an open
business model. Their endeavor was something more than that.
Something different. Something that generates not just economic
value but social and cultural value. Something that involves human
- connection. Being Made with Creative Commons is not “business
- as usual.”
+ connection. Being Made with Creative Commons is not âbusiness
+ as usual.â
We had to rethink the way we conceived of this project. And it
- didn’t happen overnight. From the fall of 2015 through 2016, we
+ didnât happen overnight. From the fall of 2015 through 2016, we
documented our thoughts in blog posts on Medium and with regular
updates to our Kickstarter backers. We shared drafts of case studies
and analysis with our Kickstarter cocreators, who provided
@@ -222,7 +222,7 @@
from each other has been one of the great joys of this work, and, we
hope, something that has made the final product much richer than it
ever could have been if either of us undertook this project alone.
- We have preserved our voices throughout, and you’ll be able to sense
+ We have preserved our voices throughout, and youâll be able to sense
our different but complementary approaches as you read through our
different sections.
@@ -233,11 +233,11 @@
Part one, the overview, begins with a big-picture framework written
by Paul. He provides some historical context for the digital
commons, describing the three ways society has managed resources and
- shared wealth—the commons, the market, and the state. He advocates
+ shared wealthâthe commons, the market, and the state. He advocates
for thinking beyond business and market terms and eloquently makes
the case for sharing and enlarging the digital commons.
- The overview continues with Sarah’s chapter, as she considers what
+ The overview continues with Sarahâs chapter, as she considers what
it means to be successfully Made with Creative Commons. While making
money is one piece of the pie, there is also a set of public-minded
values and the kind of human connections that make sharing truly
@@ -248,8 +248,8 @@
And to end part one, we have a short section that explains the
different Creative Commons licenses. We talk about the misconception
- that the more restrictive licenses—the ones that are closest to the
- all-rights-reserved model of traditional copyright—are the only ways
+ that the more restrictive licensesâthe ones that are closest to the
+ all-rights-reserved model of traditional copyrightâare the only ways
to make money.
Part two of the book is made up of the twenty-four stories of the
@@ -266,18 +266,18 @@
Commons has irrevocably changed. We hope this book inspires you and
your enterprise to use Creative Commons and in so doing contribute
to the transformation of our economy and world for the better.
- | | | | | | --\begin{flushright}
+ | Â | | Â | | Â | --\begin{flushright}
\textit{ Paul and Sarah }
- \end{flushright} |
Chapter 1. The New World of Digital Commons| | | | | | --\begin{flushright}
+ \end{flushright} |
Part I. The Big PictureChapter 1. The New World of Digital Commons|  | |  | |  | --\begin{flushright}
\textit{ Paul Stacey}
\end{flushright} |
- Jonathan Rowe eloquently describes the commons as “the air
- and oceans, the web of species, wilderness and flowing water—all
+ Jonathan Rowe eloquently describes the commons as âthe air
+ and oceans, the web of species, wilderness and flowing waterâall
are parts of the commons. So are language and knowledge, sidewalks
and public squares, the stories of childhood and the processes of
democracy. Some parts of the commons are gifts of nature, others
the product of human endeavor. Some are new, such as the Internet;
- others are as ancient as soil and calligraphy.”
+ others are as ancient as soil and calligraphy.â
In Made with Creative Commons, we focus on our current era of
digital commons, a commons of human-produced works. This commons
@@ -289,9 +289,9 @@
businesses we profile in our case studies use Creative Commons to
share their resources online over the Internet.
- The commons is not just about shared resources, however. It’s also
+ The commons is not just about shared resources, however. Itâs also
about the social practices and values that manage them. A resource
- is a noun, but to common—to put the resource into the commons—is a
+ is a noun, but to commonâto put the resource into the commonsâis a
verb. The creators, organizations, and businesses we profile
are all engaged with commoning. Their use of Creative Commons
involves them in the social practice of commoning, managing
@@ -303,7 +303,7 @@
The Commons, the Market, and the State
Historically, there have been three ways to manage resources and
share wealth: the commons (managed collectively), the state
- (i.e., the government), and the market—with the last two being
+ (i.e., the government), and the marketâwith the last two being
the dominant forms today.
The organizations and businesses in our case studies are unique
@@ -315,7 +315,7 @@
hybrids, blending the norms of the commons with those of the
market or state.
- Fig. 1.1 is a depiction of how an enterprise can have varying
+ Fig. 1.1 is a depiction of how an enterprise can have varying
levels of engagement with commons, state, and market.
Some of our case studies are simply commons and market
@@ -341,9 +341,9 @@
deliberately contribute to and build the commons. Beyond money,
laws and regulations regarding property, copyright, business,
and finance can all be designed to foster the commons.
- The Four Aspects of a Resource
- As part of her Nobel Prize–winning work, Elinor Ostrom developed
+ As part of her Nobel Prizeâwinning work, Elinor Ostrom developed
a framework for analyzing how natural resources are managed in a
commons. Her framework considered things like the biophysical
- characteristics of common resources, the community’s actors and
+ characteristics of common resources, the communityâs actors and
the interactions that take place between them, rules-in-use, and
outcomes. That framework has been simplified and generalized to
apply to the commons, the market, and the state for this
chapter.
To compare and contrast the ways in which the commons, market,
- and state work, let’s consider four aspects of resource
+ and state work, letâs consider four aspects of resource
management: resource characteristics, the people involved and
the process they use, the norms and rules they develop to govern
use, and finally actual resource use along with outcomes of that
- use (see Fig. 1.2).
-
+ use (see Fig. 1.2).
+
Resources have particular characteristics or attributes that
affect the way they can be used. Some resources are natural;
- others are human produced. And—significantly for today’s
- commons—resources can be physical or digital, which affects a
- resource’s inherent potential.
+ others are human produced. Andâsignificantly for todayâs
+ commonsâresources can be physical or digital, which affects a
+ resourceâs inherent potential.
Physical resources exist in limited supply. If I have a
physical resource and give it to you, I no longer have it.
@@ -411,8 +411,8 @@
physical one.
Beyond this idea of physical versus digital, the commons,
- market, and state conceive of resources differently (see Fig. 1.3). The market sees resources as private goods—commodities for
- sale—from which value is extracted. The state sees resources
+ market, and state conceive of resources differently (see Fig. 1.3). The market sees resources as private goodsâcommodities for
+ saleâfrom which value is extracted. The state sees resources
as public goods that provide value to state citizens. The
commons sees resources as common goods, providing a common
wealth extending beyond state boundaries, to be passed on in
@@ -443,7 +443,7 @@
in the commons by personal choice. No permission from state or
market is required. Anyone can participate in the commons and
determine for themselves the extent to which they want to be
- involved—as a contributor, user, or manager. The people
+ involvedâas a contributor, user, or manager. The people
involved include not only those who create and use resources
but those affected by outcome of use. Who you are affects your
say, actions you can take, and extent of decision making. In
@@ -452,7 +452,7 @@
users to give the original creator credit. Knowing the person
behind a resource makes the commons less anonymous and more
personal.
-
The social interactions between people, and the processes used
by the state, market, and commons, evolve social norms and
@@ -478,9 +478,9 @@
economic efficiency but also to equity and
sustainability.
- The combination of the aspects we’ve discussed so far—the
- resource’s inherent characteristics, people and processes, and
- norms and rules—shape how resources are used. Use is also
+ The combination of the aspects weâve discussed so farâthe
+ resourceâs inherent characteristics, people and processes, and
+ norms and rulesâshape how resources are used. Use is also
influenced by the different goals the state, market, and
commons have.
@@ -525,7 +525,7 @@
Commons around the world are indications of a grassroots move
toward the commons. The commons is making a resurgence. To
understand the resilience of the commons and its current
- renewal, it’s helpful to know something of its history.
+ renewal, itâs helpful to know something of its history.
For centuries, indigenous people and preindustrialized societies
managed resources, including water, food, firewood, irrigation,
@@ -533,16 +533,16 @@
commons. There was no market, no global economy. The state in
the form of rulers influenced the commons but by no means
controlled it. Direct social participation in a commons was the
- primary way in which resources were managed and needs met. (Fig. 1.4 illustrates the commons in relation to the state and the
+ primary way in which resources were managed and needs met. (Fig. 1.4 illustrates the commons in relation to the state and the
market.)
-
+
This is followed by a long history of the state (a monarchy or
ruler) taking over the commons for their own purposes. This is
- called enclosure of the commons. In olden days, “commoners” were evicted
+ called enclosure of the commons. In olden days, âcommonersâ were evicted
from the land, fences and hedges erected, laws passed, and
security set up to forbid access. Gradually, resources became the property of the
state and the state became the primary means by which resources
- were managed. (See Fig. 1.5).
+ were managed. (See Fig. 1.5).
Holdings of land, water, and game were distributed to ruling
family and political appointees. Commoners displaced from the
@@ -554,28 +554,28 @@
property laws were revised by governments to support markets,
growth, and productivity. Over time ready access to market
produced goods resulted in a rising standard of living, improved
- health, and education. Fig. 1.6 shows how today the market is the
+ health, and education. Fig. 1.6 shows how today the market is the
primary means by which resources are managed.
-
+
However, the world today is going through turbulent times. The
benefits of the market have been offset by unequal distribution
and overexploitation.
- Overexploitation was the topic of Garrett Hardin’s influential
- essay “The Tragedy of the Commons,” published in
+ Overexploitation was the topic of Garrett Hardinâs influential
+ essay âThe Tragedy of the Commons,â published in
Science in 1968. Hardin argues that everyone in a commons seeks
to maximize personal gain and will continue to do so even when
the limits of the commons are reached. The commons is then
tragically depleted to the point where it can no longer support
- anyone. Hardin’s essay became widely accepted as an economic
+ anyone. Hardinâs essay became widely accepted as an economic
truism and a justification for private property and free
markets.
- However, there is one serious flaw with Hardin’s “The
- Tragedy of the Commons”—it’s fiction. Hardin did not
+ However, there is one serious flaw with Hardinâs âThe
+ Tragedy of the Commonsââitâs fiction. Hardin did not
actually study how real commons work. Elinor Ostrom won the 2009
Nobel Prize in economics for her work studying different commons
- all around the world. Ostrom’s work shows that natural resource
+ all around the world. Ostromâs work shows that natural resource
commons can be successfully managed by local communities without
any regulation by central authorities or without privatization.
Government and privatization are not the only two choices. There
@@ -584,7 +584,7 @@
there is a regional locality. The people in the region are the
most familiar with the natural resource, have the most direct
relationship and history with it, and are therefore best
- situated to manage it. Ostrom’s approach to the governance of
+ situated to manage it. Ostromâs approach to the governance of
natural resources broke with convention; she recognized the
importance of the commons as an alternative to the market or
state for solving problems of collective action.
@@ -596,11 +596,11 @@
managing common resources together forms a community and
encourages discourse. This naturally generates norms and rules
that help people work collectively and ensure a sustainable
- commons. Paradoxically, while Hardin’s essay is called The
+ commons. Paradoxically, while Hardinâs essay is called The
Tragedy of the Commons it might more accurately be titled The
Tragedy of the Market.
- Hardin’s story is based on the premise of depletable resources.
+ Hardinâs story is based on the premise of depletable resources.
Economists have focused almost exclusively on scarcity-based
markets. Very little is known about how abundance
works. The emergence of information technology and the
@@ -616,7 +616,7 @@
scarcity. The norm for state funded digital works should be that
they are freely and openly available to the public that paid for
them.
-
In the early days of computing, programmers and developers
learned from each other by sharing software. In the 1980s, the
@@ -642,9 +642,9 @@
collaboration more appealing to companies, the
open-source-software initiative converted these principles into
licenses and standards for managing access to and distribution
- of software. The benefits of open source—such as reliability,
+ of software. The benefits of open sourceâsuch as reliability,
scalability, and quality verified by independent peer
- review—became widely recognized and accepted. Customers liked
+ reviewâbecame widely recognized and accepted. Customers liked
the way open source gave them control without being locked into
a closed, proprietary technology. Free and open-source software
also generated a network effect where the value of a product or
@@ -656,13 +656,13 @@
businesses and markets did build up around it. Business models
based on the licenses and standards of open-source software
evolved alongside organizations that managed software code on
- principles of abundance rather than scarcity. Eric Raymond’s
- essay “The Magic Cauldron” does a great job of
+ principles of abundance rather than scarcity. Eric Raymondâs
+ essay âThe Magic Cauldronâ does a great job of
analyzing the economics and business models associated with
open-source software. These models can provide examples of sustainable
approaches for those Made with Creative Commons.
- It isn’t just about an abundant availability of digital assets
+ It isnât just about an abundant availability of digital assets
but also about abundance of participation. The growth of
personal computing, information technology, and the Internet
made it possible for mass participation in producing creative
@@ -672,7 +672,7 @@
abundance, by default these digital works are governed by
copyright laws. Under copyright, a digital work is the property
of the creator, and by law others are excluded from accessing
- and using it without the creator’s permission.
+ and using it without the creatorâs permission.
But people like to share. One of the ways we define ourselves is
by sharing valuable and entertaining content. Doing so grows and
@@ -698,7 +698,7 @@
understand. It acts as a user-friendly interface to the
legal-code layer beneath. The third layer is the
machine-readable one, making it easy for the Web to know a work
- is Creative Commons–licensed by expressing permissions in a way
+ is Creative Commonsâlicensed by expressing permissions in a way
that software systems, search engines, and other kinds of
technology can understand. Taken together, these three layers ensure creators,
users, and even the Web itself understand the norms and rules
@@ -747,7 +747,7 @@
Creative Commons to ensure works funded with taxpayer dollars
are open and free to the public that paid for them.
- Today’s market is largely driven by global capitalism. Law and
+ Todayâs market is largely driven by global capitalism. Law and
financial systems are structured to support extraction,
privatization, and corporate growth. A perception that the
market is more efficient than the state has led to continual
@@ -771,8 +771,8 @@
commons as a means of enabling that balance. City governments
like Bologna, Italy, are collaborating with their citizens to
put in place regulations for the care and regeneration of urban
- commons. Seoul and Amsterdam call themselves “sharing
- cities,” looking to make sustainable and more efficient
+ commons. Seoul and Amsterdam call themselves âsharing
+ cities,â looking to make sustainable and more efficient
use of scarce resources. They see sharing as a way to improve
the use of public spaces, mobility, social cohesion, and
safety.
@@ -785,7 +785,7 @@
like a commons and more like a traditional business seeking
financial gain. Much of the sharing economy is not about the
commons or building an alternative to a corporate-driven market
- economy; it’s about extending the deregulated free market into
+ economy; itâs about extending the deregulated free market into
new areas of our lives. While none of the people we interviewed for our case
studies would describe themselves as part of the sharing
economy, there are in fact some significant parallels. Both the
@@ -834,7 +834,7 @@
rules by which the market operates.
For an ordinary corporation, making social benefit a part of its
- operations is difficult, as it’s legally required to make
+ operations is difficult, as itâs legally required to make
decisions that financially benefit stockholders. But new forms
of business are emerging. There are benefit corporations and
social enterprises, which broaden their business goals from
@@ -844,26 +844,26 @@
alternatives to the traditional corporation. Collectively, these
alternative market entities are changing the rules and norms of
the market.
- “A book on open business models” is how we
- described it in this book’s Kickstarter campaign. We used a
+ âA book on open business modelsâ is how we
+ described it in this bookâs Kickstarter campaign. We used a
handbook called Business Model Generation as our reference for
defining just what a business model is. Developed over nine
- years using an “open process” involving 470
+ years using an âopen processâ involving 470
coauthors from forty-five countries, it is useful as a framework
for talking about business models.
- It contains a “business model canvas,” which
+ It contains a âbusiness model canvas,â which
conceives of a business model as having nine building
blocks. This blank canvas can serve as a tool for anyone to
design their own business model. We remixed this business model
canvas into an open business model canvas, adding three more
building blocks relevant to hybrid market, commons enterprises:
- social good, Creative Commons license, and “type of open
- environment that the business fits in.” This enhanced canvas proved useful when we analyzed
+ social good, Creative Commons license, and âtype of open
+ environment that the business fits in.â This enhanced canvas proved useful when we analyzed
businesses and helped start-ups plan their economic model.
In our case study interviews, many expressed discomfort over
- describing themselves as an open business model—the term
+ describing themselves as an open business modelâthe term
business model suggested primarily being situated in the market.
Where you sit on the commons-to-market spectrum affects the
extent to which you see yourself as a business in the market.
@@ -877,8 +877,8 @@
The creators, businesses, and organizations we profile all
engage with the market to generate revenue in some way. The ways
in which this is done vary widely. Donations, pay what you can,
- memberships, “digital for free but physical for a
- fee,” crowdfunding, matchmaking, value-add services,
+ memberships, âdigital for free but physical for a
+ fee,â crowdfunding, matchmaking, value-add services,
patrons . . . the list goes on and on. (Initial description of
how to earn revenue available through reference note. For latest
thinking see How to Bring In Money in the next
@@ -917,7 +917,7 @@
of others, contributing your own, and mixing yours with others
to create new works are all dynamic forms of participation made
possible by the commons. Being Made with Creative Commons means
- you’re engaging as many users with your resources as possible.
+ youâre engaging as many users with your resources as possible.
Users are also authoring, editing, remixing, curating,
localizing, translating, and distributing. The commons makes it
possible for people to directly participate in culture,
@@ -1030,11 +1030,11 @@
take. Be open and inclusive. Add value. Make visible what you
are using from the commons, what you are adding, and what you
are monetizing. Maximize abundance. Give attribution. Express
- gratitude. Develop trust; don’t exploit. Build relationship and
+ gratitude. Develop trust; donât exploit. Build relationship and
community. Be transparent. Defend the commons.
The new digital commons is here to stay. Made With Creative
- Commons case studies show how it’s possible to be part of this
+ Commons case studies show how itâs possible to be part of this
commons while still functioning within market and state systems.
The commons generates benefits neither the market nor state can
achieve on their own. Rather than the market or state dominating
@@ -1062,9 +1062,9 @@
Chapter 2. How to Be Made with Creative Commons| | | | | | --\begin{flushright}
+ Business Review Press, 2006), 31â44.
+ Chapter 2. How to Be Made with Creative Commons|  | |  | |  | --\begin{flushright}
\textit{ Sarah Hinchliff Pearson}
\end{flushright} |
When we began this project in August 2015, we set out to write a
book about business models that involve Creative Commons licenses
- in some significant way—what we call being Made with Creative
+ in some significant wayâwhat we call being Made with Creative
Commons. With the help of our Kickstarter backers, we chose
twenty-four endeavors from all around the world that are Made with
Creative Commons. The mix is diverse, from an individual musician
@@ -1206,9 +1206,9 @@
Some make their own content and share under Creative Commons
licensing. Others are platforms for CC-licensed creative work made
by others. Many sit somewhere in between, both using and
- contributing creative work that’s shared with the public. Like all
- who use the licenses, these endeavors share their work—whether
- it’s open data or furniture designs—in a way that enables the
+ contributing creative work thatâs shared with the public. Like all
+ who use the licenses, these endeavors share their workâwhether
+ itâs open data or furniture designsâin a way that enables the
public not only to access it but also to make use of it.
We analyzed the revenue models, customer segments, and value
@@ -1224,23 +1224,23 @@
was quite different from the one that was revealing itself in our
interviews and research.
- It isn’t that we were wrong to think you can make money while
+ It isnât that we were wrong to think you can make money while
using Creative Commons licenses. In many instances, CC can help
make you more money. Nor were we wrong that there are business
models out there that others who want to use CC licensing as part
- of their livelihood or business could replicate. What we didn’t
+ of their livelihood or business could replicate. What we didnât
realize was just how misguided it would be to write a book about
being Made with Creative Commons using only a business lens.
According to the seminal handbook Business Model Generation, a
- business model “describes the rationale of how an
+ business model âdescribes the rationale of how an
organization creates, delivers, and captures
- value.” Thinking about sharing in terms of creating and
+ value.â Thinking about sharing in terms of creating and
capturing value always felt inappropriately transactional and out
of place, something we heard time and time again in our
interviews. And as Cory Doctorow told us in our interview with
- him, “Business model can mean anything you want it to
- mean.”
+ him, âBusiness model can mean anything you want it to
+ mean.â
Eventually, we got it. Being Made with Creative Commons is more
than a business model. While we will talk about specific revenue
@@ -1254,7 +1254,7 @@
up the practical lessons and takeaways. I spent months trying to
jam what we learned into the business-model box, convinced there
must be some formula for the way things interacted. But there is
- no formula. You’ll probably have to discard that way of thinking
+ no formula. Youâll probably have to discard that way of thinking
before you read any further.
In every interview, we started from the same simple questions.
@@ -1291,11 +1291,11 @@
Whether the public makes use of the opportunity to copy and adapt
your work, sharing with a Creative Commons license is a symbol of
how you want to interact with the people who consume your work.
- Whenever you create something, “all rights reserved”
- under copyright is automatic, so the copyright symbol (©) on the
+ Whenever you create something, âall rights reservedâ
+ under copyright is automatic, so the copyright symbol (©) on the
work does not necessarily come across as a marker of distrust or
excessive protectionism. But using a CC license can be a symbol of
- the opposite—of wanting a real human relationship, rather than an
+ the oppositeâof wanting a real human relationship, rather than an
impersonal market transaction. It leaves open the possibility of
connection.
@@ -1309,15 +1309,15 @@
The driving motivation varies depending on the type of endeavor.
For individual creators, it is most often about personal
inspiration. In some ways, this is nothing new. As Doctorow has
- written, “Creators usually start doing what they do for
- love.” But when you share your creative work under a CC
+ written, âCreators usually start doing what they do for
+ love.â But when you share your creative work under a CC
license, that dynamic is even more pronounced. Similarly, for
technological innovators, it is often less about creating a
specific new thing that will make you rich and more about solving
a specific problem you have. The creators of Arduino told us that
- the key question when creating something is “Do you as the
+ the key question when creating something is âDo you as the
creator want to use it? It has to have personal use and
- meaning.”
+ meaning.â
Many that are Made with Creative Commons have an express social
mission that underpins everything they do. In many cases, sharing
@@ -1325,7 +1325,7 @@
using the licenses can be the difference between legitimacy and
hypocrisy. Noun Project co-founder Edward Boatman told us they
could not have stated their social mission of sharing with a
- straight face if they weren’t willing to show the world that it
+ straight face if they werenât willing to show the world that it
was OK to share their content using a Creative Commons license.
This dynamic is probably one reason why there are so many
@@ -1337,7 +1337,7 @@
profit is not paramount, and producing social good and human
connection are integral to success.
- Even if profit isn’t the end goal, you have to bring in money to
+ Even if profit isnât the end goal, you have to bring in money to
be successfully Made with Creative Commons. At a bare minimum, you
have to make enough money to keep the lights on.
@@ -1346,19 +1346,19 @@
than there used to be for any creative endeavor. Digital
technology has made it easier than ever to create, and easier than
ever to distribute. As Doctorow put it in his book Information
- Doesn’t Want to Be Free, “If analog dollars have turned into
+ Doesnât Want to Be Free, âIf analog dollars have turned into
digital dimes (as the critics of ad-supported media have it),
- there is the fact that it’s possible to run a business that gets
+ there is the fact that itâs possible to run a business that gets
the same amount of advertising as its forebears at a fraction of
- the price.”
+ the price.â
Some creation costs are the same as they always were. It takes the
same amount of time and money to write a peer-reviewed journal
- article or paint a painting. Technology can’t change that. But
+ article or paint a painting. Technology canât change that. But
other costs are dramatically reduced by technology, particularly
in production-heavy domains like filmmaking. CC-licensed content and content in the public domain,
as well as the work of volunteer collaborators, can also
- dramatically reduce costs if they’re being used as resources to
+ dramatically reduce costs if theyâre being used as resources to
create something new. And, of course, there is the reality that
some content would be created whether or not the creator is paid
because it is a labor of love.
@@ -1373,31 +1373,31 @@
promotion, and even expenses associated with the various ways
money is being made, like touring or custom training.
- It’s important to recognize that the biggest impact of technology
+ Itâs important to recognize that the biggest impact of technology
on creative endeavors is that creators can now foot the costs of
creation and distribution themselves. People now often have a
direct route to their potential public without necessarily needing
intermediaries like record labels and book publishers. Doctorow
- wrote, “If you’re a creator who never got the time of day
+ wrote, âIf youâre a creator who never got the time of day
from one of the great imperial powers, this is your time. Where
once you had no means of reaching an audience without the
assistance of the industry-dominating megacompanies, now you have
- hundreds of ways to do it without them.” Previously, distribution of creative work involved the
+ hundreds of ways to do it without them.â Previously, distribution of creative work involved the
costs associated with sustaining a monolithic entity, now creators
can do the work themselves. That means the financial needs of
creative endeavors can be a lot more modest.
Whether for an individual creator or a larger endeavor, it usually
- isn’t enough to break even if you want to make what you’re doing a
+ isnât enough to break even if you want to make what youâre doing a
livelihood. You need to build in some support for the general
operation. This extra bit looks different for everyone, but
importantly, in nearly all cases for those Made with Creative
- Commons, the definition of “enough money” looks a lot
+ Commons, the definition of âenough moneyâ looks a lot
different than it does in the world of venture capital and stock
options. It is more about sustainability and less about unlimited
growth and profit. SparkFun founder Nathan Seidle told us,
- “Business model is a really grandiose word for it. It is
- really just about keeping the operation going day to day.”
+ âBusiness model is a really grandiose word for it. It is
+ really just about keeping the operation going day to day.â
This book is a testament to the notion that it is possible to make
money while using CC licenses and CC-licensed content, but we are
@@ -1408,40 +1408,40 @@
There are, however, plenty of ways in which CC licensing can be
good for business in fairly predictable ways. The first is how it
- helps solve “problem zero.”
+ helps solve âproblem zero.â
Problem Zero: Getting Discovered
Once you create or collect your content, the next step is
- finding users, customers, fans—in other words, your people. As
- Amanda Palmer wrote, “It has to start with the art. The
+ finding users, customers, fansâin other words, your people. As
+ Amanda Palmer wrote, âIt has to start with the art. The
songs had to touch people initially, and mean something, for
- anything to work at all.” There isn’t any magic to finding your people, and
+ anything to work at all.â There isnât any magic to finding your people, and
there is certainly no formula. Your work has to connect with
people and offer them some artistic and/or utilitarian value. In
some ways, this is easier than ever. Online we are not limited
by shelf space, so there is room for every obscure interest,
taste, and need imaginable. This is what Chris Anderson dubbed
the Long Tail, where consumption becomes less about mainstream
- mass “hits” and more about micromarkets for every
- particular niche. As Anderson wrote, “We are all
+ mass âhitsâ and more about micromarkets for every
+ particular niche. As Anderson wrote, âWe are all
different, with different wants and needs, and the Internet now
has a place for all of them in the way that physical markets did
- not.” We are no longer limited to what appeals to the
+ not.â We are no longer limited to what appeals to the
masses.
- While finding “your people” online is theoretically
+ While finding âyour peopleâ online is theoretically
easier than in the analog world, as a practical matter it can
still be difficult to actually get noticed. The Internet is a
firehose of content, one that only grows larger by the minute.
As a content creator, not only are you competing for attention
against more content creators than ever before, you are
competing against creativity generated outside the market as
- well. Anderson wrote, “The greatest change of the
+ well. Anderson wrote, âThe greatest change of the
past decade has been the shift in time people spend consuming
amateur content instead of professional
- content.” To top it all off, you have to compete against the
- rest of their lives, too—“friends, family, music
+ content.â To top it all off, you have to compete against the
+ rest of their lives, tooââfriends, family, music
playlists, soccer games, and nights on the
- town.” Somehow, some way, you have to get noticed by the
+ town.â Somehow, some way, you have to get noticed by the
right people.
When you come to the Internet armed with an all-rights-reserved
@@ -1449,20 +1449,20 @@
your work before there is even any demand for it. In many cases,
requiring payment for your work is part of the traditional
copyright system. Even a tiny cost has a big effect on demand.
- It’s called the penny gap—the large difference in demand between
+ Itâs called the penny gapâthe large difference in demand between
something that is available at the price of one cent versus the
- price of zero. That doesn’t mean it is wrong to charge money for
+ price of zero. That doesnât mean it is wrong to charge money for
your content. It simply means you need to recognize the effect
that doing so will have on demand. The same principle applies to
restricting access to copy the work. If your problem is how to
- get discovered and find “your people,” prohibiting
+ get discovered and find âyour people,â prohibiting
people from copying your work and sharing it with others is
counterproductive.
- Of course, it’s not that being discovered by people who like
- your work will make you rich—far from it. But as Cory Doctorow
- says, “Recognition is one of many necessary preconditions
- for artistic success.”
+ Of course, itâs not that being discovered by people who like
+ your work will make you richâfar from it. But as Cory Doctorow
+ says, âRecognition is one of many necessary preconditions
+ for artistic success.â
Choosing not to spend time and energy restricting access to your
work and policing infringement also builds goodwill. Lumen
@@ -1478,25 +1478,25 @@
undermine your social mission. It also may alienate the people
who most value your creative work. If people like your work,
their natural instinct will be to share it with others. But as
- David Bollier wrote, “Our natural human impulses to
- imitate and share—the essence of culture—have been
- criminalized.”
+ David Bollier wrote, âOur natural human impulses to
+ imitate and shareâthe essence of cultureâhave been
+ criminalized.â
The fact that copying can carry criminal penalties undoubtedly
deters copying it, but copying with the click of a button is too
easy and convenient to ever fully stop it. Try as the copyright
industry might to persuade us otherwise, copying a copyrighted
- work just doesn’t feel like stealing a loaf of bread. And, of
- course, that’s because it isn’t. Sharing a creative work has no
- impact on anyone else’s ability to make use of it.
+ work just doesnât feel like stealing a loaf of bread. And, of
+ course, thatâs because it isnât. Sharing a creative work has no
+ impact on anyone elseâs ability to make use of it.
If you take some amount of copying and sharing your work as a
given, you can invest your time and resources elsewhere, rather
than wasting them on playing a cat and mouse game with people
who want to copy and share your work. Lizzy Jongma from the
- Rijksmuseum said, “We could spend a lot of money trying to
+ Rijksmuseum said, âWe could spend a lot of money trying to
protect works, but people are going to do it anyway. And they
- will use bad-quality versions.” Instead, they started
+ will use bad-quality versions.â Instead, they started
releasing high-resolution digital copies of their collection
into the public domain and making them available for free on
their website. For them, sharing was a form of quality control
@@ -1511,8 +1511,8 @@
is. When you see information abundance as a feature, not
a bug, you start thinking about the ways to use the idling
capacity of your content to your advantage. As my friend and
- colleague Eric Steuer once said, “Using CC licenses shows
- you get the Internet.”
+ colleague Eric Steuer once said, âUsing CC licenses shows
+ you get the Internet.â
Cory Doctorow says it costs him nothing when other people make
copies of his work, and it opens the possibility that he might
@@ -1527,15 +1527,15 @@
There are all kinds of way to leverage the power of sharing and
remix to your benefit. Here are a few.
Use CC to grow a larger audience
- Putting a Creative Commons license on your content won’t make
+ Putting a Creative Commons license on your content wonât make
it automatically go viral, but eliminating legal barriers to
- copying the work certainly can’t hurt the chances that your
+ copying the work certainly canât hurt the chances that your
work will be shared. The CC license symbolizes that sharing is
welcome. It can act as a little tap on the shoulder to those
- who come across the work—a nudge to copy the work if they have
+ who come across the workâa nudge to copy the work if they have
any inkling of doing so. All things being equal, if one piece
- of content has a sign that says Share and the other says Don’t
- Share (which is what “©” means), which do you
+ of content has a sign that says Share and the other says Donât
+ Share (which is what â©â means), which do you
think people are more likely to share?
The Conversation is an online news site with in-depth articles
@@ -1548,12 +1548,12 @@
The idea that more eyeballs equates with more success is a
form of the max strategy, adopted by Google and other
- technology companies. According to Google’s Eric Schmidt, the
- idea is simple: “Take whatever it is you are doing and
+ technology companies. According to Googleâs Eric Schmidt, the
+ idea is simple: âTake whatever it is you are doing and
do it at the max in terms of distribution. The other way of
saying this is that since marginal cost of distribution is
free, you might as well put things
- everywhere.” This strategy is what often motivates companies to
+ everywhere.â This strategy is what often motivates companies to
make their products and services free (i.e., no cost), but the
same logic applies to making content freely shareable. Because
CC-licensed content is free (as in cost) and can be freely
@@ -1601,7 +1601,7 @@
Attribution can be about more than just receiving credit. It
can also be about establishing provenance. People naturally
- want to know where content came from—the source of a work is
+ want to know where content came fromâthe source of a work is
sometimes just as interesting as the work itself. Opendesk is
a platform for furniture designers to share their designs.
Consumers who like those designs can then get matched with
@@ -1625,13 +1625,13 @@
Made with Creative Commons make money by providing a product
or service other than the CC-licensed work. Sometimes that
other product or service is completely unrelated to the CC
- content. Other times it’s a physical copy or live performance
+ content. Other times itâs a physical copy or live performance
of the CC content. In all cases, the CC content can attract
people to your other product or service.
- Knowledge Unlatched’s Pinter told us she has seen time and
- again how offering CC-licensed content—that is, digitally for
- free—actually increases sales of the printed goods because it
+ Knowledge Unlatchedâs Pinter told us she has seen time and
+ again how offering CC-licensed contentâthat is, digitally for
+ freeâactually increases sales of the printed goods because it
functions as a marketing tool. We see this phenomenon
regularly with famous artwork. The Mona Lisa is likely the
most recognizable painting on the planet. Its ubiquity has the
@@ -1668,7 +1668,7 @@
Four of the six CC licenses enable reusers to take apart,
build upon, or otherwise adapt the work. Depending on the
context, adaptation can mean wildly different
- things—translating, updating, localizing, improving,
+ thingsâtranslating, updating, localizing, improving,
transforming. It enables a work to be customized for
particular needs, uses, people, and communities, which is
another distinct value to offer the public. Adaptation is more game changing in some contexts
@@ -1679,9 +1679,9 @@
This is a way to counteract a potential downside of the
abundance of free and open content described above. As
- Anderson wrote in Free, “People often don’t care as much
- about things they don’t pay for, and as a result they don’t
- think as much about how they consume them.” If even the tiny act of volition of paying one
+ Anderson wrote in Free, âPeople often donât care as much
+ about things they donât pay for, and as a result they donât
+ think as much about how they consume them.â If even the tiny act of volition of paying one
penny for something changes our perception of that thing, then
surely the act of remixing it enhances our perception
exponentially. We know that people will pay more for products
@@ -1694,9 +1694,9 @@
aimless consumption that anyone who has absentmindedly
scrolled through their social-media feeds for an hour knows
all too well. In his book, Cognitive Surplus, Clay Shirky
- says, “To participate is to act as if your presence
+ says, âTo participate is to act as if your presence
matters, as if, when you see something or hear something, your
- response is part of the event.” Opening the door to your content can get people
+ response is part of the event.â Opening the door to your content can get people
more deeply tied to your work.
Use CC to differentiate yourself
Operating under a traditional copyright regime usually means
@@ -1704,14 +1704,14 @@
media. Business strategies that are embedded in the
traditional copyright system, like using digital rights
management (DRM) and signing exclusivity contracts, can tie
- the hands of creators, often at the expense of the creator’s
+ the hands of creators, often at the expense of the creatorâs
best interest. Being Made with Creative Commons means you can
function without those barriers and, in many cases, use the
increased openness as a competitive advantage. David Harris
from OpenStax said they specifically pursue strategies they
- know that traditional publishers cannot. “Don’t go into
- a market and play by the incumbent rules,” David said.
- “Change the rules of engagement.”
+ know that traditional publishers cannot. âDonât go into
+ a market and play by the incumbent rules,â David said.
+ âChange the rules of engagement.â
Like any moneymaking endeavor, those that are Made with Creative
Commons have to generate some type of value for their audience
@@ -1733,9 +1733,9 @@
strategy is using grant funding for content creation when
research-and-development costs are particularly high, and then
finding a different revenue stream (or streams) for ongoing
- expenses. As Shirky wrote, “The trick is in knowing when
+ expenses. As Shirky wrote, âThe trick is in knowing when
markets are an optimal way of organizing interactions and when
- they are not.”
+ they are not.â
Our case studies explore in more detail the various
revenue-generating mechanisms used by the creators,
@@ -1766,20 +1766,20 @@
not. If people can easily find your content for free,
getting people to buy it will be difficult, particularly in a
context where access to content is more important than owning
- it. In Free, Anderson wrote, “Copyright protection
+ it. In Free, Anderson wrote, âCopyright protection
schemes, whether coded into either law or software, are simply
- holding up a price against the force of gravity.”
+ holding up a price against the force of gravity.â
- Of course, this doesn’t mean that content-driven endeavors
+ Of course, this doesnât mean that content-driven endeavors
have no future in the traditional marketplace. In Free,
Anderson explains how when one product or service becomes
free, as information and content largely have in the digital
- age, other things become more valuable. “Every abundance
- creates a new scarcity,” he wrote. You just have to
+ age, other things become more valuable. âEvery abundance
+ creates a new scarcity,â he wrote. You just have to
find some way other than the content to provide value to your
- audience or customers. As Anderson says, “It’s easy to
+ audience or customers. As Anderson says, âItâs easy to
compete with Free: simply offer something better or at least
- different from the free version.”
+ different from the free version.â
In light of this reality, in some ways endeavors that are Made
with Creative Commons are at a level playing field with all
@@ -1798,15 +1798,15 @@
Here are the most common high-level categories.
Providing a custom service to consumers of your work
[MARKET-BASED]
- In this age of information abundance, we don’t lack for
+ In this age of information abundance, we donât lack for
content. The trick is finding content that matches our needs
and wants, so customized services are particularly valuable.
- As Anderson wrote, “Commodity information (everybody
+ As Anderson wrote, âCommodity information (everybody
gets the same version) wants to be free. Customized
information (you get something unique and meaningful to you)
- wants to be expensive.” This can be anything from the artistic and
- cultural consulting services provided by Ártica to the
- custom-song business of Jonathan “Song-A-Day”
+ wants to be expensive.â This can be anything from the artistic and
+ cultural consulting services provided by Ãrtica to the
+ custom-song business of Jonathan âSong-A-Dayâ
Mann.
Charging for the physical copy
[MARKET-BASED]
@@ -1814,10 +1814,10 @@
model as giving away the bits and selling the atoms (where
bits refers to digital content and atoms refer to a physical
object). This is particularly successful in domains where
- the digital version of the content isn’t as valuable as the
+ the digital version of the content isnât as valuable as the
analog version, like book publishing where a significant
subset of people still prefer reading something they can hold
- in their hands. Or in domains where the content isn’t useful
+ in their hands. Or in domains where the content isnât useful
until it is in physical form, like furniture designs. In those
situations, a significant portion of consumers will pay for
the convenience of having someone else put the physical
@@ -1860,8 +1860,8 @@
is free increases the size of the audience, which in turn
makes the offer more valuable to the paying customers. This is
a variation of a traditional business model built on free
- called multi-sided platforms. Access to your audience isn’t the only thing
- people are willing to pay for—there are other services you can
+ called multi-sided platforms. Access to your audience isnât the only thing
+ people are willing to pay forâthere are other services you can
provide as well.
Charging advertisers or sponsors
[MARKET-BASED]
@@ -1883,7 +1883,7 @@
Obviously, this revenue stream is only available to those who
rely on work created, at least in part, by others. The most
well-known version of this model is the
- “author-processing charge” of open-access
+ âauthor-processing chargeâ of open-access
journals like those published by the Public Library of
Science, but there are other variations. The Conversation is
primarily funded by a university-membership model, where
@@ -1932,22 +1932,22 @@
revenue streams were more about providing value, building a
relationship, and then eventually finding some money that
flows back out of a sense of reciprocity. While some look like
- traditional nonprofit funding models, they aren’t charity. The
+ traditional nonprofit funding models, they arenât charity. The
endeavor exchange value with people, just not necessarily
synchronously or in a way that requires that those values be
equal. As David Bollier wrote in Think Like a Commoner,
- “There is no self-serving calculation of whether the
- value given and received is strictly equal.”
+ âThere is no self-serving calculation of whether the
+ value given and received is strictly equal.â
- This should be a familiar dynamic—it is the way you deal with
+ This should be a familiar dynamicâit is the way you deal with
your friends and family. We give without regard for what and
- when we will get back. David Bollier wrote, “Reciprocal
+ when we will get back. David Bollier wrote, âReciprocal
social exchange lies at the heart of human identity, community
and culture. It is a vital brain function that helps the human
- species survive and evolve.”
+ species survive and evolve.â
What is rare is to incorporate this sort of relationship into
- an endeavor that also engages with the market. We almost can’t help but think of relationships in
+ an endeavor that also engages with the market. We almost canât help but think of relationships in
the market as being centered on an even-steven exchange of
value.
Memberships and individual donations
@@ -1968,10 +1968,10 @@
The pay-what-you-want model
[RECIPROCITY-BASED]
In the pay-what-you-want model, the beneficiary of Creative
- Commons content is invited to give—at any amount they can and
+ Commons content is invited to giveâat any amount they can and
feel is appropriate, based on the public and personal value
they feel is generated by the open content. Critically, these
- models are not touted as “buying” something free.
+ models are not touted as âbuyingâ something free.
They are similar to a tip jar. People make financial
contributions as an act of gratitude. These models capitalize
on the fact that we are naturally inclined to give money for
@@ -1982,19 +1982,19 @@
Crowdfunding models are based on recouping the costs of
creating and distributing content before the content is
created. If the endeavor is Made with Creative Commons, anyone
- who wants the work in question could simply wait until it’s
+ who wants the work in question could simply wait until itâs
created and then access it for free. That means, for this
model to work, people have to care about more than just
receiving the work. They have to want you to succeed. Amanda
Palmer credits the success of her crowdfunding on Kickstarter
and Patreon to the years she spent building her community and
creating a connection with her fans. She wrote in The Art of
- Asking, “Good art is made, good art is shared, help is
+ Asking, âGood art is made, good art is shared, help is
offered, ears are bent, emotions are exchanged, the compost of
real, deep connection is sprayed all over the fields. Then one
day, the artist steps up and asks for something. And if the
ground has been fertilized enough, the audience says, without
- hesitation: of course.”
+ hesitation: of course.â
Other types of crowdfunding rely on a sense of responsibility
that a particular community may feel. Knowledge Unlatched
@@ -2005,16 +2005,16 @@
to the idea of open access generally.
Regardless of how they made money, in our interviews, we
- repeatedly heard language like “persuading people to
- buy” and “inviting people to pay.” We heard
+ repeatedly heard language like âpersuading people to
+ buyâ and âinviting people to pay.â We heard
it even in connection with revenue streams that sit squarely
- within the market. Cory Doctorow told us, “I have to
+ within the market. Cory Doctorow told us, âI have to
convince my readers that the right thing to do is to pay
- me.” The founders of the for-profit company Lumen
+ me.â The founders of the for-profit company Lumen
Learning showed us the letter they send to those who opt not to
pay for the services they provide in connection with their
- CC-licensed educational content. It isn’t a cease-and-desist
- letter; it’s an invitation to pay because it’s the right thing
+ CC-licensed educational content. It isnât a cease-and-desist
+ letter; itâs an invitation to pay because itâs the right thing
to do. This sort of behavior toward what could be considered
nonpaying customers is largely unheard of in the traditional
marketplace. But it seems to be part of the fabric of being Made
@@ -2022,7 +2022,7 @@
Nearly every endeavor we profiled relied, at least in part, on
people being invested in what they do. The closer the Creative
- Commons content is to being “the product,” the more
+ Commons content is to being âthe product,â the more
pronounced this dynamic has to be. Rather than simply selling a
product or service, they are making ideological, personal, and
creative connections with the people who value what they do.
@@ -2050,12 +2050,12 @@
terms, but also about community, social good, contributing
ideas, expressing a value system, working together. These
components of sharing are hard to cultivate if you think about
- what you do in purely market terms. Decent social behavior isn’t
+ what you do in purely market terms. Decent social behavior isnât
as intuitive when we are doing something that involves monetary
exchange. It takes a conscious effort to foster the context for
real sharing, based not strictly on impersonal market exchange,
but on connections with the people with whom you
- share—connections with you, with your work, with your values,
+ shareâconnections with you, with your work, with your values,
with each other.
The rest of this section will explore some of the common
@@ -2078,24 +2078,24 @@
humanity. For some, this means pouring their lives out on the
page. For others, it means showing their creative process,
giving a glimpse into how they do what they do. As writer
- Austin Kleon wrote, “Our work doesn’t speak for itself.
+ Austin Kleon wrote, âOur work doesnât speak for itself.
Human beings want to know where things came from, how they
were made, and who made them. The stories you tell about the
work you do have a huge effect on how people feel and what
they understand about your work, and how people feel and what
they understand about your work affects how they value
- it.”
+ it.â
A critical component to doing this effectively is not worrying
- about being a “brand.” That means not being
- afraid to be vulnerable. Amanda Palmer says, “When
- you’re afraid of someone’s judgment, you can’t connect with
- them. You’re too preoccupied with the task of impressing
- them.” Not everyone is suited to live life as an open
- book like Palmer, and that’s OK. There are a lot of ways to be
+ about being a âbrand.â That means not being
+ afraid to be vulnerable. Amanda Palmer says, âWhen
+ youâre afraid of someoneâs judgment, you canât connect with
+ them. Youâre too preoccupied with the task of impressing
+ them.â Not everyone is suited to live life as an open
+ book like Palmer, and thatâs OK. There are a lot of ways to be
human. The trick is just avoiding pretense and the temptation
- to artificially craft an image. People don’t just want the
- glossy version of you. They can’t relate to it, at least not
+ to artificially craft an image. People donât just want the
+ glossy version of you. They canât relate to it, at least not
in a meaningful way.
This advice is probably even more important for businesses and
@@ -2104,17 +2104,17 @@
people!). When corporations and organizations make the people
behind them more apparent, it reminds people that they are
dealing with something other than an anonymous corporate
- entity. In business-speak, this is about “humanizing
- your interactions” with the public. But it can’t be a gimmick. You can’t fake being
+ entity. In business-speak, this is about âhumanizing
+ your interactionsâ with the public. But it canât be a gimmick. You canât fake being
human.
Transparency helps people understand who you are and why you
do what you do, but it also inspires trust. Max Temkin of
- Cards Against Humanity told us, “One of the most
+ Cards Against Humanity told us, âOne of the most
surprising things you can do in capitalism is just be honest
- with people.” That means sharing the good and the bad.
- As Amanda Palmer wrote, “You can fix almost anything by
- authentically communicating.” It isn’t about trying to satisfy everyone or
+ with people.â That means sharing the good and the bad.
+ As Amanda Palmer wrote, âYou can fix almost anything by
+ authentically communicating.â It isnât about trying to satisfy everyone or
trying to sugarcoat mistakes or bad news, but instead about
explaining your rationale and then being prepared to defend it
when people are critical.
@@ -2126,7 +2126,7 @@
collaboration. Instead, it can be as simple as asking for input
and then giving context and explanation about decisions you
make, even if soliciting feedback and inviting discourse is
- time-consuming. If you don’t go through the effort to actually
+ time-consuming. If you donât go through the effort to actually
respond to the input you receive, it can be worse than not
inviting input in the first place. But when you get it right, it can guarantee the
type of diversity of thought that helps endeavors excel. And
@@ -2135,44 +2135,44 @@
Design for the good actors
Traditional economics assumes people make decisions based
solely on their own economic self-interest. Any relatively introspective human knows this is a
- fiction—we are much more complicated beings with a whole range
+ fictionâwe are much more complicated beings with a whole range
of needs, emotions, and motivations. In fact, we are hardwired
to work together and ensure fairness. Being Made with Creative Commons requires an
assumption that people will largely act on those social
motivations, motivations that would be considered
- “irrational” in an economic sense. As Knowledge
- Unlatched’s Pinter told us, “It is best to ignore people
+ âirrationalâ in an economic sense. As Knowledge
+ Unlatchedâs Pinter told us, âIt is best to ignore people
who try to scare you about free riding. That fear is based on
- a very shallow view of what motivates human behavior.”
+ a very shallow view of what motivates human behavior.â
There will always be people who will act in purely selfish
ways, but endeavors that are Made with Creative Commons design
for the good actors.
The assumption that people will largely do the right thing can
be a self-fulfilling prophecy. Shirky wrote in Cognitive
- Surplus, “Systems that assume people will act in ways
+ Surplus, âSystems that assume people will act in ways
that create public goods, and that give them opportunities and
rewards for doing so, often let them work together better than
- neoclassical economics would predict.” When we acknowledge that people are often
+ neoclassical economics would predict.â When we acknowledge that people are often
motivated by something other than financial self-interest, we
design our endeavors in ways that encourage and accentuate our
social instincts.
- Rather than trying to exert control over people’s behavior,
+ Rather than trying to exert control over peopleâs behavior,
this mode of operating requires a certain level of trust. We
might not realize it, but our daily lives are already built on
trust. As Surowiecki wrote in The Wisdom of Crowds,
- “It’s impossible for a society to rely on law alone to
- make sure citizens act honestly and responsibly. And it’s
+ âItâs impossible for a society to rely on law alone to
+ make sure citizens act honestly and responsibly. And itâs
impossible for any organization to rely on contracts alone to
make sure that its managers and workers live up to their
- obligation.” Instead, we largely trust that
- people—mostly strangers—will do what they are supposed to
+ obligation.â Instead, we largely trust that
+ peopleâmostly strangersâwill do what they are supposed to
do. And most often, they do.
Treat humans like, well, humans
For creators, treating people as humans means not treating
- them like fans. As Kleon says, “If you want fans, you
- have to be a fan first.” Even if you happen to be one of the few to reach
+ them like fans. As Kleon says, âIf you want fans, you
+ have to be a fan first.â Even if you happen to be one of the few to reach
celebrity levels of fame, you are better off remembering that
the people who follow your work are human, too. Cory Doctorow
makes a point to answer every single email someone sends him.
@@ -2186,7 +2186,7 @@
one-on-one interaction with users.
When we treat people like humans, they typically return the
- gift in kind. It’s called karma. But social relationships are
+ gift in kind. Itâs called karma. But social relationships are
fragile. It is all too easy to destroy them if you make the
mistake of treating people as anonymous customers or free
labor. Platforms that rely on content from contributors
@@ -2195,8 +2195,8 @@
value that contributors generate. That does not mean you can
solve this problem by simply paying contributors for their
time or contributions. As soon as we introduce money into a
- relationship—at least when it takes a form of paying monetary
- value in exchange for other value—it can dramatically change
+ relationshipâat least when it takes a form of paying monetary
+ value in exchange for other valueâit can dramatically change
the dynamic.
State your principles and stick to them
Being Made with Creative Commons makes a statement about who
@@ -2208,9 +2208,9 @@
as a way of demonstrating their own commitment to the Creative
Commons value system, akin to a political statement. Other
times people will identify and feel connected with an
- endeavor’s separate social mission. Often both.
+ endeavorâs separate social mission. Often both.
- The expression of your values doesn’t have to be implicit. In
+ The expression of your values doesnât have to be implicit. In
fact, many of the people we interviewed talked about how
important it is to state your guiding principles up front.
Lumen Learning attributes a lot of their success to having
@@ -2221,7 +2221,7 @@
resources) community in which they operate.
When your end goal is not about making a profit, people trust
- that you aren’t just trying to extract value for your own
+ that you arenât just trying to extract value for your own
gain. People notice when you have a sense of purpose that
transcends your own self-interest. It attracts committed employees, motivates
contributors, and builds trust.
@@ -2237,30 +2237,30 @@
recognize and are drawn to the values symbolized by using CC.
To be sustainable, though, you have to work to nurture
- community. People have to care—about you and each other. One
+ community. People have to careâabout you and each other. One
critical piece to this is fostering a sense of belonging. As
- Jono Bacon writes in The Art of Community, “If there is
- no belonging, there is no community.” For Amanda Palmer
+ Jono Bacon writes in The Art of Community, âIf there is
+ no belonging, there is no community.â For Amanda Palmer
and her band, that meant creating an accepting and inclusive
- environment where people felt a part of their “weird
- little family.” For organizations like Red Hat, that means
+ environment where people felt a part of their âweird
+ little family.â For organizations like Red Hat, that means
connecting around common beliefs or goals. As the CEO Jim
- Whitehurst wrote in The Open Organization, “Tapping into
+ Whitehurst wrote in The Open Organization, âTapping into
passion is especially important in building the kinds of
participative communities that drive open
- organizations.”
+ organizations.â
Communities that collaborate together take deliberate
- planning. Surowiecki wrote, “It takes a lot of work to
- put the group together. It’s difficult to ensure that people
- are working in the group’s interest and not in their own. And
- when there’s a lack of trust between the members of the group
- (which isn’t surprising given that they don’t really know each
+ planning. Surowiecki wrote, âIt takes a lot of work to
+ put the group together. Itâs difficult to ensure that people
+ are working in the groupâs interest and not in their own. And
+ when thereâs a lack of trust between the members of the group
+ (which isnât surprising given that they donât really know each
other), considerable energy is wasted trying to determine each
- other’s bona fides.” Building true community requires giving people
+ otherâs bona fides.â Building true community requires giving people
within the community the power to create or influence the
rules that govern the community. If the rules are created and imposed in a top-down
- manner, people feel like they don’t have a voice, which in
+ manner, people feel like they donât have a voice, which in
turn leads to disengagement.
Community takes work, but working together, or even simply
@@ -2271,8 +2271,8 @@
should try to extract as much money as possible from
resources. This is essentially what defines so much of the
so-called sharing economy. In an article on the Harvard
- Business Review website called “The Sharing Economy
- Isn’t about Sharing at All,” authors Giana Eckhardt and
+ Business Review website called âThe Sharing Economy
+ Isnât about Sharing at All,â authors Giana Eckhardt and
Fleura Bardhi explained how the anonymous market-driven
trans-actions in most sharing-economy businesses are purely
about monetizing access. As Lisa Gansky put it in her book The Mesh, the
@@ -2281,10 +2281,10 @@
ownership. That is not sharing.
Sharing requires adding as much or more value to the ecosystem
- than you take. You can’t simply treat open content as a free
+ than you take. You canât simply treat open content as a free
pool of resources from which to extract value. Part of giving
back to the ecosystem is contributing content back to the
- public under CC licenses. But it doesn’t have to just be about
+ public under CC licenses. But it doesnât have to just be about
creating content; it can be about adding value in other ways.
The social blogging platform Medium provides value to its
community by incentivizing good behavior, and the result is an
@@ -2321,16 +2321,16 @@
valuable in the aggregate. Those same sorts of small
contributions would be less useful for many other types of
creative work, and people are inherently less motivated to
- contribute when it doesn’t appear that their efforts will make
+ contribute when it doesnât appear that their efforts will make
much of a difference.
It is easy to romanticize the opportunities for global
cocreation made possible by the Internet, and, indeed, the
successful examples of it are truly incredible and inspiring.
- But in a wide range of circumstances—perhaps more often than
- not—community cocreation is not part of the equation, even
+ But in a wide range of circumstancesâperhaps more often than
+ notâcommunity cocreation is not part of the equation, even
within endeavors built on CC content. Shirky wrote,
- “Sometimes the value of professional work trumps the
+ âSometimes the value of professional work trumps the
value of amateur sharing or a feeling of belonging. The textbook publisher OpenStax, which distributes
all of its material for free under CC licensing, is an example
of this dynamic. Rather than tapping the community to help
@@ -2339,8 +2339,8 @@
individual creators, where the creative work is the basis for
what they do, community cocreation is only rarely a part of
the picture. Even musician Amanda Palmer, who is famous for
- her openness and involvement with her fans, said,”The
- only department where I wasn’t open to input was the writing,
+ her openness and involvement with her fans, said,âThe
+ only department where I wasnât open to input was the writing,
the music itself."
While we tend to immediately think of cocreation and remixing
@@ -2348,11 +2348,11 @@
others in your creative process in more informal ways, by
sharing half-baked ideas and early drafts, and interacting
with the public to incubate ideas and get feedback. So-called
- “making in public” opens the door to letting
+ âmaking in publicâ opens the door to letting
people feel more invested in your creative work. And it shows a nonterritorial approach to ideas
and information. Stephen Covey (of The 7 Habits of Highly
Effective People fame) calls this the abundance
- mentality—treating ideas like something plentiful—and it can
+ mentalityâtreating ideas like something plentifulâand it can
create an environment where collaboration
flourishes.
@@ -2371,16 +2371,16 @@
book is available at
http://strategyzer.com/books/business-model-generation.
Chapter 3. The Creative Commons Licenses
+ Chapter 3. The Creative Commons Licenses
All of the Creative Commons licenses grant a basic set of
permissions. At a minimum, a CC- licensed work can be copied and
shared in its original form for noncommercial purposes so long as
@@ -2583,7 +2583,7 @@
tweak, and build upon your work, even for commercial purposes, as
long as they credit you and license their new creations under
identical terms. This license is often compared to
- “copyleft” free and open source software licenses.
+ âcopyleftâ free and open source software licenses.
All new works based on yours will carry the same license, so any
derivatives will also allow commercial use.
@@ -2597,7 +2597,7 @@
The Attribution-NonCommercial license (CC BY-NC) lets others
remix, tweak, and build upon your work noncommercially. Although
- their new works must also acknowledge you, they don’t have to
+ their new works must also acknowledge you, they donât have to
license their derivative works on the same terms.
@@ -2612,19 +2612,19 @@
The Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs license (CC BY-NC-ND) is
the most restrictive of our six main licenses, only allowing
others to download your works and share them with others as long
- as they credit you, but they can’t change them or use them
+ as they credit you, but they canât change them or use them
commercially.
In addition to these six licenses, Creative Commons has two
- public-domain tools—one for creators and the other for those who
+ public-domain toolsâone for creators and the other for those who
manage collections of existing works by authors whose terms of
copyright have expired:
CC0 enables authors and copyright owners to dedicate their works
- to the worldwide public domain (“no rights
- reserved”).
+ to the worldwide public domain (âno rights
+ reservedâ).
@@ -2650,7 +2650,7 @@
those ways. It is certainly true that a license that allows others
to make commercial use of your work (CC BY, CC BY-SA, and CC
BY-ND) forecloses some traditional revenue streams. If you apply
- an Attribution (CC BY) license to your book, you can’t force a
+ an Attribution (CC BY) license to your book, you canât force a
film company to pay you royalties if they turn your book into a
feature-length film, or prevent another company from selling
physical copies of your work.
@@ -2662,7 +2662,7 @@
rights that copyright grants to creators. In some cases, reserving
those rights is important to how you bring in revenue. In other
cases, creators use a NonCommercial or NoDerivs license because
- they can’t give up on the dream of hitting the creative jackpot.
+ they canât give up on the dream of hitting the creative jackpot.
The music platform Tribe of Noise told us the NonCommercial
licenses were popular among their users because people still held
out the dream of having a major record label discover their work.
@@ -2688,9 +2688,9 @@
For more about the licenses including examples and tips on sharing
your work in the digital commons, start with the Creative Commons
- page called “Share Your Work” at
+ page called âShare Your Workâ at
http://creativecommons.org/share-your-work/.
- Part II. The Case StudiesPart II. The Case Studies
The twenty-four case studies in this section were chosen from
hundreds of nominations received from Kickstarter backers, Creative
Commons staff, and the global Creative Commons community. We
@@ -2705,7 +2705,7 @@
The idea for each case study is to tell the story about the endeavor
and the role sharing plays within it, largely the way in which it
was told to us by those we interviewed.
- | |
+ | Â |
Arduino is a for-profit open-source electronics platform and
computer hardware and software company. Founded in 2005 in
Italy.
@@ -2719,7 +2719,7 @@
2016
Interviewees: David
Cuartielles and Tom Igoe, cofounders
- | | | | --\begin{flushright}
+ | Â | | Â | --\begin{flushright}
\textit{
Profile written by Paul Stacey
}
@@ -2727,7 +2727,7 @@
In 2005, at the Interaction Design Institute Ivrea in northern
Italy, teachers and students needed an easy way to use electronics
and programming to quickly prototype design ideas. As musicians,
- artists, and designers, they needed a platform that didn’t require
+ artists, and designers, they needed a platform that didnât require
engineering expertise. A group of teachers and students, including
Massimo Banzi, David Cuartielles, Tom Igoe, Gianluca Martino, and
David Mellis, built a platform that combined different open
@@ -2737,30 +2737,30 @@
documentation with the Attribution-Share-Alike license (CC BY-SA),
and software with the GNU General Public License.
- Arduino boards are able to read inputs—light on a sensor, a finger
- on a button, or a Twitter message—and turn it into
- outputs—activating a motor, turning on an LED, publishing
+ Arduino boards are able to read inputsâlight on a sensor, a finger
+ on a button, or a Twitter messageâand turn it into
+ outputsâactivating a motor, turning on an LED, publishing
something online. You send a set of instructions to the
microcontroller on the board by using the Arduino programming
language and Arduino software (based on a piece of open-source
software called Processing, a programming tool used to make visual
art).
- “The reasons for making Arduino open source are
- complicated,” Tom says. Partly it was about supporting
+ âThe reasons for making Arduino open source are
+ complicated,â Tom says. Partly it was about supporting
flexibility. The open-source nature of Arduino empowers users to
modify it and create a lot of different variations, adding on top
- of what the founders build. David says this “ended up
+ of what the founders build. David says this âended up
strengthening the platform far beyond what we had even thought of
- building.”
+ building.â
For Tom another factor was the impending closure of the Ivrea
- design school. He’d seen other organizations close their doors and
+ design school. Heâd seen other organizations close their doors and
all their work and research just disappear. Open-sourcing ensured
that Arduino would outlive the Ivrea closure. Persistence is one
thing Tom really likes about open source. If key people leave, or
- a company shuts down, an open-source product lives on. In Tom’s
- view, “Open sourcing makes it easier to trust a
- product.”
+ a company shuts down, an open-source product lives on. In Tomâs
+ view, âOpen sourcing makes it easier to trust a
+ product.â
With the school closing, David and some of the other Arduino
founders started a consulting firm and multidisciplinary design
@@ -2770,14 +2770,14 @@
Revenue from Tinker was invested in sustaining and enhancing
Arduino.
- For Tom, part of Arduino’s success is because the founders made
+ For Tom, part of Arduinoâs success is because the founders made
themselves the first customer of their product. They made products
- they themselves personally wanted. It was a matter of “I
- need this thing,” not “If we make this, we’ll make a
- lot of money.” Tom notes that being your own first customer
+ they themselves personally wanted. It was a matter of âI
+ need this thing,â not âIf we make this, weâll make a
+ lot of money.â Tom notes that being your own first customer
makes you more confident and convincing at selling your product.
- Arduino’s business model has evolved over time—and Tom says model
+ Arduinoâs business model has evolved over timeâand Tom says model
is a grandiose term for it. Originally, they just wanted to make a
few boards and get them out into the world. They started out with
two hundred boards, sold them, and made a little profit. They used
@@ -2786,17 +2786,17 @@
generate enough funding to keep the venture going day to day. When
they hit the ten thousand mark, they started to think about
Arduino as a company. By then it was clear you can open-source the
- design but still manufacture the physical product. As long as it’s
+ design but still manufacture the physical product. As long as itâs
a quality product and sold at a reasonable price, people will buy
it.
- Arduino now has a worldwide community of makers—students,
+ Arduino now has a worldwide community of makersâstudents,
hobbyists, artists, programmers, and professionals. Arduino
provides a wiki called Playground (a wiki is where all users can
edit and add pages, contributing to and benefiting from collective
research). People share code, circuit diagrams, tutorials, DIY
instructions, and tips and tricks, and show off their projects. In
- addition, there’s a multilanguage discussion forum where users can
+ addition, thereâs a multilanguage discussion forum where users can
get help using Arduino, discuss topics like robotics, and make
suggestions for new Arduino product designs. As of January 2017,
324,928 members had made 2,989,489 posts on 379,044 topics. The
@@ -2813,15 +2813,15 @@
For a business, getting to the end of the year and not being in
the red is a success. Arduino may have an open-licensing strategy,
but they are still a business, and all the things needed to
- successfully run one still apply. David says, “If you do
+ successfully run one still apply. David says, âIf you do
those other things well, sharing things in an open-source way can
- only help you.”
+ only help you.â
While openly licensing the designs, documentation, and software
- ensures longevity, it does have risks. There’s a possibility that
+ ensures longevity, it does have risks. Thereâs a possibility that
others will create knockoffs, clones, and copies. The CC BY-SA
license means anyone can produce copies of their boards, redesign
- them, and even sell boards that copy the design. They don’t have
+ them, and even sell boards that copy the design. They donât have
to pay a license fee to Arduino or even ask permission. However,
if they republish the design of the board, they have to give
attribution to Arduino. If they change the design, they must
@@ -2849,16 +2849,16 @@
plugged onto a board to give it extra features), and
kits.
- Arduino’s focus is on high-quality boards, well-designed support
+ Arduinoâs focus is on high-quality boards, well-designed support
materials, and the building of community; this focus is one of the
keys to their success. And being open lets you build a real
- community. David says Arduino’s community is a big strength and
- something that really does matter—in his words, “It’s good
- business.” When they started, the Arduino team had almost
+ community. David says Arduinoâs community is a big strength and
+ something that really does matterâin his words, âItâs good
+ business.â When they started, the Arduino team had almost
entirely no idea how to build a community. They started by
conducting numerous workshops, working directly with people using
the platform to make sure the hardware and software worked the way
- it was meant to work and solved people’s problems. The community
+ it was meant to work and solved peopleâs problems. The community
grew organically from there.
A key decision for Arduino was trademarking the name. The founders
@@ -2870,7 +2870,7 @@
sell boards using the Arduino name and logo, they have to pay a
small fee to Arduino. This allows Arduino to scale up
manufacturing and distribution while at the same time ensuring the
- Arduino brand isn’t hurt by low-quality copies.
+ Arduino brand isnât hurt by low-quality copies.
Current official manufacturers are Smart Projects in Italy,
SparkFun in the United States, and Dog Hunter in Taiwan/China.
@@ -2878,10 +2878,10 @@
Arduino logo on their boards. Trademarking their brand provided
the founders with a way to protect Arduino, build it out further,
and fund software and tutorial development. The
- trademark-licensing fee for the brand became Arduino’s
+ trademark-licensing fee for the brand became Arduinoâs
revenue-generating model.
- How far to open things up wasn’t always something the founders
+ How far to open things up wasnât always something the founders
perfectly agreed on. David, who was always one to advocate for
opening things up more, had some fears about protecting the
Arduino name, thinking people would be mad if they policed their
@@ -2894,10 +2894,10 @@
there is anything that really needs to be protected and why. There
are lots of good reasons to not open up certain elements. This
strategy of sharing everything is certainly the complete opposite
- of how today’s world operates, where nothing is shared. Tom
+ of how todayâs world operates, where nothing is shared. Tom
suggests a business formalize which elements are based on open
sharing and which are closed. An Arduino blog post from 2013
- entitled “Send In the Clones,” by one of the founders
+ entitled âSend In the Clones,â by one of the founders
Massimo Banzi, does a great job of explaining the full
complexities of how trademarking their brand has played out,
distinguishing between official boards and those that are clones,
@@ -2905,23 +2905,23 @@
For David, an exciting aspect of Arduino is the way lots of people
can use it to adapt technology in many different ways. Technology
- is always making more things possible but doesn’t always focus on
+ is always making more things possible but doesnât always focus on
making it easy to use and adapt. This is where Arduino steps in.
- Arduino’s goal is “making things that help other people make
- things.”
+ Arduinoâs goal is âmaking things that help other people make
+ things.â
Arduino has been hugely successful in making technology and
electronics reach a larger audience. For Tom, Arduino has been
- about “the democratization of technology.” Tom sees
- Arduino’s open-source strategy as helping the world get over the
+ about âthe democratization of technology.â Tom sees
+ Arduinoâs open-source strategy as helping the world get over the
idea that technology has to be protected. Tom says,
- “Technology is a literacy everyone should learn.”
+ âTechnology is a literacy everyone should learn.â
- Ultimately, for Arduino, going open has been good business—good
+ Ultimately, for Arduino, going open has been good businessâgood
for product development, good for distribution, good for pricing,
and good for manufacturing.
- | |
- Ártica provides online courses and consulting services focused
+ | Â |
+ Ãrtica provides online courses and consulting services focused
on how to use digital technology to share knowledge and enable
collaboration in arts and culture. Founded in 2011 in Uruguay.
@@ -2931,17 +2931,17 @@
Interview date: March 9, 2016
Interviewees: Mariana
Fossatti and Jorge Gemetto, cofounders
- | | | | --\begin{flushright}
+ | Â | | Â | --\begin{flushright}
\textit{
Profile written by Sarah Hinchliff Pearson
}
\end{flushright} |
- The story of Mariana Fossatti and Jorge Gemetto’s business,
- Ártica, is the ultimate example of DIY. Not only are they
+ The story of Mariana Fossatti and Jorge Gemettoâs business,
+ Ãrtica, is the ultimate example of DIY. Not only are they
successful entrepreneurs, the niche in which their small business
operates is essentially one they built themselves.
- Their dream jobs didn’t exist, so they created them.
+ Their dream jobs didnât exist, so they created them.
In 2011, Mariana was a sociologist working for an international
organization to develop research and online education about
@@ -2949,12 +2949,12 @@
in online education. Both were bloggers and heavy users of social
media, and both had a passion for arts and culture. They decided
to take their skills in digital technology and online learning and
- apply them to a topic area they loved. They launched Ártica, an
+ apply them to a topic area they loved. They launched Ãrtica, an
online business that provides education and consulting for people
and institutions creating artistic and cultural projects on the
Internet.
- Ártica feels like a uniquely twenty-first century business. The
+ Ãrtica feels like a uniquely twenty-first century business. The
small company has a global online presence with no physical
offices. Jorge and Mariana live in Uruguay, and the other two
full-time employees, who Jorge and Mariana have never actually met
@@ -2966,20 +2966,20 @@
directly tap into an audience without relying upon gatekeepers or
intermediaries.
- Ártica offers personalized education and consulting services, and
+ Ãrtica offers personalized education and consulting services, and
helps clients implement projects. All of these services are
- customized. They call it an “artisan” process because
+ customized. They call it an âartisanâ process because
of the time and effort it takes to adapt their work for the
- particular needs of students and clients. “Each student or
+ particular needs of students and clients. âEach student or
client is paying for a specific solution to his or her problems
- and questions,” Mariana said. Rather than sell access to
+ and questions,â Mariana said. Rather than sell access to
their content, they provide it for free and charge for the
personalized services.
When they started, they offered a smaller number of courses
- designed to attract large audiences. “Over the years, we
+ designed to attract large audiences. âOver the years, we
realized that online communities are more specific than we
- thought,” Mariana said. Ártica now provides more options
+ thought,â Mariana said. Ãrtica now provides more options
for classes and has lower enrollment in each course. This means
they can provide more attention to individual students and offer
classes on more specialized topics.
@@ -2991,69 +2991,69 @@
institutions, and some are smaller projects commissioned by
individual artists.
- Ártica also seeks out public and private funding for specific
+ Ãrtica also seeks out public and private funding for specific
projects. Sometimes, even if they are unsuccessful in subsidizing
a project like a new course or e-book, they will go ahead because
they believe in it. They take the stance that every new project
leads them to something new, every new resource they create opens
new doors.
- Ártica relies heavily on their free Creative Commons–licensed
+ Ãrtica relies heavily on their free Creative Commonsâlicensed
content to attract new students and clients. Everything they
- create—online education, blog posts, videos—is published under an
- Attribution-ShareAlike license (CC BY-SA). “We use a
+ createâonline education, blog posts, videosâis published under an
+ Attribution-ShareAlike license (CC BY-SA). âWe use a
ShareAlike license because we want to give the greatest freedom to
our students and readers, and we also want that freedom to be
- viral,” Jorge said. For them, giving others the right to
- reuse and remix their content is a fundamental value. “How
+ viral,â Jorge said. For them, giving others the right to
+ reuse and remix their content is a fundamental value. âHow
can you offer an online educational service without giving
permission to download, make and keep copies, or print the
- educational resources?” Jorge said. “If we want to do
- the best for our students—those who trust in us to the point that
- they are willing to pay online without face-to-face contact—we
- have to offer them a fair and ethical agreement.”
+ educational resources?â Jorge said. âIf we want to do
+ the best for our studentsâthose who trust in us to the point that
+ they are willing to pay online without face-to-face contactâwe
+ have to offer them a fair and ethical agreement.â
They also believe sharing their ideas and expertise openly helps
them build their reputation and visibility. People often share and
cite their work. A few years ago, a publisher even picked up one
- of their e-books and distributed printed copies. Ártica views
+ of their e-books and distributed printed copies. Ãrtica views
reuse of their work as a way to open up new opportunities for
their business.
This belief that openness creates new opportunities reflects
- another belief—in serendipity. When describing their process for
+ another beliefâin serendipity. When describing their process for
creating content, they spoke of all of the spontaneous and organic
- ways they find inspiration. “Sometimes, the collaborative
+ ways they find inspiration. âSometimes, the collaborative
process starts with a conversation between us, or with friends
- from other projects,” Jorge said. “That can be the
+ from other projects,â Jorge said. âThat can be the
first step for a new blog post or another simple piece of content,
which can evolve to a more complex product in the future, like a
- course or a book.”
+ course or a book.â
Rather than planning their work in advance, they let their
- creative process be dynamic. “This doesn’t mean that we
- don’t need to work hard in order to get good professional results,
- but the design process is more flexible,” Jorge said. They
+ creative process be dynamic. âThis doesnât mean that we
+ donât need to work hard in order to get good professional results,
+ but the design process is more flexible,â Jorge said. They
share early and often, and they adjust based on what they learn,
always exploring and testing new ideas and ways of operating. In
many ways, for them, the process is just as important as the final
product.
People and relationships are also just as important, sometimes
- more. “In the educational and cultural business, it is more
+ more. âIn the educational and cultural business, it is more
important to pay attention to people and process, rather than
- content or specific formats or materials,” Mariana said.
- “Materials and content are fluid. The important thing is the
- relationships.”
+ content or specific formats or materials,â Mariana said.
+ âMaterials and content are fluid. The important thing is the
+ relationships.â
- Ártica believes in the power of the network. They seek to make
+ Ãrtica believes in the power of the network. They seek to make
connections with people and institutions across the globe so they
can learn from them and share their knowledge.
- At the core of everything Ártica does is a set of values.
- “Good content is not enough,” Jorge said. “We
+ At the core of everything Ãrtica does is a set of values.
+ âGood content is not enough,â Jorge said. âWe
also think that it is very important to take a stand for some
- things in the cultural sector.” Mariana and Jorge are
+ things in the cultural sector.â Mariana and Jorge are
activists. They defend free culture (the movement promoting the
freedom to modify and distribute creative work) and work to
demonstrate the intersection between free culture and other
@@ -3063,27 +3063,27 @@
Ultimately, what drives their work is a mission to democratize art
and culture.
- Of course, Ártica also has to make enough money to cover its
+ Of course, Ãrtica also has to make enough money to cover its
expenses. Human resources are, by far, their biggest expense. They
tap a network of collaborators on a case-by-case basis and hire
contractors for specific projects. Whenever possible, they draw
from artistic and cultural resources in the commons, and they rely
on free software. Their operation is small, efficient, and
sustainable, and because of that, it is a success.
- “There are lots of people offering online courses,”
- Jorge said. “But it is easy to differentiate us. We have an
- approach that is very specific and personal.” Ártica’s
+ âThere are lots of people offering online courses,â
+ Jorge said. âBut it is easy to differentiate us. We have an
+ approach that is very specific and personal.â Ãrticaâs
model is rooted in the personal at every level. For Mariana and
Jorge, success means doing what brings them personal meaning and
purpose, and doing it sustainably and collaboratively.
In their work with younger artists, Mariana and Jorge try to
emphasize that this model of success is just as valuable as the
- picture of success we get from the media. “If they seek only
- the traditional type of success, they will get frustrated,”
- Mariana said. “We try to show them another image of what it
- looks like.”
- Chapter 6. Blender Institute| |
+ picture of success we get from the media. âIf they seek only
+ the traditional type of success, they will get frustrated,â
+ Mariana said. âWe try to show them another image of what it
+ looks like.â
+ Chapter 6. Blender Institute|  |
The Blender Institute is an animation studio that creates 3-D
films using Blender software. Founded in 2006 in the
Netherlands.
@@ -3095,7 +3095,7 @@
Interview date: March 8, 2016
Interviewee: Francesco Siddi,
production coordinator
- | | | | --\begin{flushright}
+ | Â | | Â | --\begin{flushright}
\textit{
Profile written by Sarah Hinchliff Pearson
}
@@ -3121,18 +3121,18 @@
Rather than just talking about the theoretical benefits of sharing
and free culture, Ton is very much about doing and making free
- culture. Blender’s production coordinator Francesco Siddi told us,
- “Ton believes if you don’t make content using your tools,
- then you’re not doing anything.”
+ culture. Blenderâs production coordinator Francesco Siddi told us,
+ âTon believes if you donât make content using your tools,
+ then youâre not doing anything.â
- Blender’s history begins in the late 1990s, when Ton created the
+ Blenderâs history begins in the late 1990s, when Ton created the
Blender software. Originally, the software was an in-house
resource for his animation studio based in the Netherlands.
Investors became interested in the software, so he began marketing
the software to the public, offering a free version in addition to
a paid version. Sales were disappointing, and his investors gave
up on the endeavor in the early 2000s. He made a deal with
- investors—if he could raise enough money, he could then make the
+ investorsâif he could raise enough money, he could then make the
Blender software available under the GNU General Public License.
This was long before Kickstarter and other online crowdfunding
@@ -3141,17 +3141,17 @@
software became freely available for anyone to use. Simply
applying the General Public License to the software, however, was
not enough to create a thriving community around it. Francesco
- told us, “Software of this complexity relies on people and
+ told us, âSoftware of this complexity relies on people and
their vision of how people work together. Ton is a fantastic
community builder and manager, and he put a lot of work into
fostering a community of developers so that the project could
- live.”
+ live.â
Like any successful free and open-source software project, Blender
developed quickly because the community could make fixes and
- improvements. “Software should be free and open to
- hack,” Francesco said. “Otherwise, everyone is doing
- the same thing in the dark for ten years.” Ton set up the
+ improvements. âSoftware should be free and open to
+ hack,â Francesco said. âOtherwise, everyone is doing
+ the same thing in the dark for ten years.â Ton set up the
Blender Foundation to oversee and steward the software development
and maintenance.
@@ -3168,15 +3168,15 @@
They had about twenty people working full-time for six to ten
months, so the costs were significant. Francesco said that when
their crowdfunding campaign succeeded, people were astounded.
- “The idea that making money was possible by producing
- CC-licensed material was mind-blowing to people,” he said.
- “They were like, ‘I have to see it to believe
- it.’”
+ âThe idea that making money was possible by producing
+ CC-licensed material was mind-blowing to people,â he said.
+ âThey were like, âI have to see it to believe
+ it.ââ
The first film, which was released in 2006, was an experiment. It
was so successful that Ton decided to set up the Blender
Institute, an entity dedicated to hosting open-movie projects. The
- Blender Institute’s next project was an even bigger success. The
+ Blender Instituteâs next project was an even bigger success. The
film, Big Buck Bunny, went viral, and its animated characters were
picked up by marketers.
@@ -3187,37 +3187,37 @@
almost on an industrial scale because of the number of moving
parts. This requires a lot of specialized assistance, but the
Blender Institute has no problem finding the talent it needs to
- help on projects. “Blender hardly does any recruiting for
- film projects because the talent emerges naturally,”
- Francesco said. “So many people want to work with us, and we
- can’t always hire them because of budget constraints.”
+ help on projects. âBlender hardly does any recruiting for
+ film projects because the talent emerges naturally,â
+ Francesco said. âSo many people want to work with us, and we
+ canât always hire them because of budget constraints.â
Blender has had a lot of success raising money from its community
over the years. In many ways, the pitch has gotten easier to make.
Not only is crowdfunding simply more familiar to the public, but
people know and trust Blender to deliver, and Ton has developed a
reputation as an effective community leader and visionary for
- their work. “There is a whole community who sees and
- understands the benefit of these projects,” Francesco said.
+ their work. âThere is a whole community who sees and
+ understands the benefit of these projects,â Francesco said.
While these benefits of each open-movie project make a compelling
pitch for crowdfunding campaigns, Francesco told us the Blender
Institute has found some limitations in the standard crowdfunding
model where you propose a specific project and ask for funding.
- “Once a project is over, everyone goes home,” he
- said. “It is great fun, but then it ends. That is a
- problem.”
+ âOnce a project is over, everyone goes home,â he
+ said. âIt is great fun, but then it ends. That is a
+ problem.â
To make their work more sustainable, they needed a way to receive
ongoing support rather than on a project-by-project basis. Their
solution is Blender Cloud, a subscription-style crowdfunding model
akin to the online crowdfunding platform, Patreon. For about ten
euros each month, subscribers get access to download everything
- the Blender Institute produces—software, art, training, and more.
+ the Blender Institute producesâsoftware, art, training, and more.
All of the assets are available under an Attribution license (CC
BY) or placed in the public domain (CC0), but they are initially
made available only to subscribers. Blender Cloud enables
- subscribers to follow Blender’s movie projects as they develop,
+ subscribers to follow Blenderâs movie projects as they develop,
sharing detailed information and content used in the creative
process. Blender Cloud also has extensive training materials and
libraries of characters and other assets used in various projects.
@@ -3225,8 +3225,8 @@
The continuous financial support provided by Blender Cloud
subsidizes five to six full-time employees at the Blender
Institute. Francesco says their goal is to grow their subscriber
- base. “This is our freedom,” he told us, “and
- for artists, freedom is everything.”
+ base. âThis is our freedom,â he told us, âand
+ for artists, freedom is everything.â
Blender Cloud is the primary revenue stream of the Blender
Institute. The Blender Foundation is funded primarily by
@@ -3244,15 +3244,15 @@
Since 2006, he has been making films available along with all of
their source material. He says he has hardly ever seen people
- stepping into Blender’s shoes and trying to make money off of
+ stepping into Blenderâs shoes and trying to make money off of
their content. Ton believes this is because the true value of what
- they do is in the creative and production process. “Even
+ they do is in the creative and production process. âEven
when you share everything, all your original sources, it still
takes a lot of talent, skills, time, and budget to reproduce what
- you did,” Ton said.
+ you did,â Ton said.
For Ton and Blender, it all comes back to doing.
- Chapter 7. Cards Against Humanity| |
+ Chapter 7. Cards Against Humanity|  |
Cards Against Humanity is a private, for-profit company that
makes a popular party game by the same name. Founded in 2011 in
the U.S.
@@ -3264,15 +3264,15 @@
2016
Interviewee: Max Temkin,
cofounder
- | | | | --\begin{flushright}
+ | Â | | Â | --\begin{flushright}
\textit{
Profile written by Sarah Hinchliff Pearson
}
\end{flushright} |
If you ask cofounder Max Temkin, there is nothing particularly
interesting about the Cards Against Humanity business model.
- “We make a product. We sell it for money. Then we spend less
- money than we make,” Max said.
+ âWe make a product. We sell it for money. Then we spend less
+ money than we make,â Max said.
He is right. Cards Against Humanity is a simple party game,
modeled after the game Apples to Apples. To play, one player asks
@@ -3280,7 +3280,7 @@
the other players submit their funniest white card in response.
The catch is that all of the cards are filled with crude,
gruesome, and otherwise awful things. For the right kind of people
- (“horrible people,” according to Cards Against
+ (âhorrible people,â according to Cards Against
Humanity advertising), this makes for a hilarious and fun game.
The revenue model is simple. Physical copies of the game are sold
@@ -3302,58 +3302,58 @@
same noncommercial terms. The ability to adapt the game is like an
entire new game unto itself.
- All together, these factors—the crass tone of the game and
+ All together, these factorsâthe crass tone of the game and
company, the free download, the openness to fans remixing the
- game—give the game a massive cult following.
+ gameâgive the game a massive cult following.
Their success is not the result of a grand plan. Instead, Cards
Against Humanity was the last in a long line of games and comedy
projects that Max Temkin and his friends put together for their
own amusement. As Max tells the story, they made the game so they
- could play it themselves on New Year’s Eve because they were too
+ could play it themselves on New Yearâs Eve because they were too
nerdy to be invited to other parties. The game was a hit, so they
decided to put it up online as a free PDF. People started asking
if they could pay to have the game printed for them, and
eventually they decided to run a Kickstarter to fund the printing.
- They set their Kickstarter goal at $4,000—and raised $15,000. The
+ They set their Kickstarter goal at $4,000âand raised $15,000. The
game was officially released in May 2011.
The game caught on quickly, and it has only grown more popular
over time. Max says the eight founders never had a meeting where
- they decided to make it an ongoing business. “It kind of
- just happened,” he said.
+ they decided to make it an ongoing business. âIt kind of
+ just happened,â he said.
- But this tale of a “happy accident” belies marketing
+ But this tale of a âhappy accidentâ belies marketing
genius. Just like the game, the Cards Against Humanity brand is
irreverent and memorable. It is hard to forget a company that
- calls the FAQ on their website “Your dumb questions.”
+ calls the FAQ on their website âYour dumb questions.â
Like most quality satire, however, there is more to the joke than
- vulgarity and shock value. The company’s marketing efforts around
+ vulgarity and shock value. The companyâs marketing efforts around
Black Friday illustrate this particularly well. For those outside
the United States, Black Friday is the term for the day after the
Thanksgiving holiday, the biggest shopping day of the year. It is
an incredibly important day for Cards Against Humanity, like it is
for all U.S. retailers. Max said they struggled with what to do on
- Black Friday because they didn’t want to support what he called
- the “orgy of consumerism” the day has become,
+ Black Friday because they didnât want to support what he called
+ the âorgy of consumerismâ the day has become,
particularly since it follows a day that is about being grateful
for what you have. In 2013, after deliberating, they decided to
have an Everything Costs $5 More sale.
- “We sweated it out the night before Black Friday, wondering
- if our fans were going to hate us for it,” he said.
- “But it made us laugh so we went with it. People totally
- caught the joke.”
+ âWe sweated it out the night before Black Friday, wondering
+ if our fans were going to hate us for it,â he said.
+ âBut it made us laugh so we went with it. People totally
+ caught the joke.â
This sort of bold transparency delights the media, but more
- importantly, it engages their fans. “One of the most
+ importantly, it engages their fans. âOne of the most
surprising things you can do in capitalism is just be honest with
- people,” Max said. “It shocks people that there is
- transparency about what you are doing.”
+ people,â Max said. âIt shocks people that there is
+ transparency about what you are doing.â
- Max also likened it to a grand improv scene. “If we do
+ Max also likened it to a grand improv scene. âIf we do
something a little subversive and unexpected, the public wants to
- be a part of the joke.” One year they did a Give Cards
+ be a part of the joke.â One year they did a Give Cards
Against Humanity $5 event, where people literally paid them five
dollars for no reason. Their fans wanted to make the joke funnier
by making it successful. They made $70,000 in a single day.
@@ -3361,14 +3361,14 @@
This remarkable trust they have in their customers is what
inspired their decision to apply a Creative Commons license to the
game. Trusting your customers to reuse and remix your work
- requires a leap of faith. Cards Against Humanity obviously isn’t
+ requires a leap of faith. Cards Against Humanity obviously isnât
afraid of doing the unexpected, but there are lines even they do
not want to cross. Before applying the license, Max said they
worried that some fans would adapt the game to include all of the
jokes they intentionally never made because they crossed that
- line. “It happened, and the world didn’t end,” Max
- said. “If that is the worst cost of using CC, I’d pay that a
- hundred times over because there are so many benefits.”
+ line. âIt happened, and the world didnât end,â Max
+ said. âIf that is the worst cost of using CC, Iâd pay that a
+ hundred times over because there are so many benefits.â
Any successful product inspires its biggest fans to create remixes
of it, but unsanctioned adaptations are more likely to fly under
@@ -3377,11 +3377,11 @@
and promote their creations openly. Today there are thousands of
fan expansions of the game.
- Max said, “CC was a no-brainer for us because it gets the
+ Max said, âCC was a no-brainer for us because it gets the
most people involved. Making the game free and available under a
CC license led to the unbelievable situation where we are one of
the best-marketed games in the world, and we have never spent a
- dime on marketing.”
+ dime on marketing.â
Of course, there are limits to what the company allows its
customers to do with the game. They chose the
@@ -3389,8 +3389,8 @@
people from using the game to make money. It also requires that
adaptations of the game be made available under the same licensing
terms if they are shared publicly. Cards Against Humanity also
- polices its brand. “We feel like we’re the only ones who can
- use our brand and our game and make money off of it,” Max
+ polices its brand. âWe feel like weâre the only ones who can
+ use our brand and our game and make money off of it,â Max
said. About 99.9 percent of the time, they just send an email to
those making commercial use of the game, and that is the end of
it. There have only been a handful of instances where they had to
@@ -3400,13 +3400,13 @@
Humanity business model, the same can be said of the game itself.
To be playable, every white card has to work syntactically with
enough black cards. The eight creators invest an incredible amount
- of work into creating new cards for the game. “We have
- daylong arguments about commas,” Max said. “The
+ of work into creating new cards for the game. âWe have
+ daylong arguments about commas,â Max said. âThe
slacker tone of the cards gives people the impression that it is
easy to write them, but it is actually a lot of work and
- quibbling.”
+ quibbling.â
- That means cocreation with their fans really doesn’t work. The
+ That means cocreation with their fans really doesnât work. The
company has a submission mechanism on their website, and they get
thousands of suggestions, but it is very rare that a submitted
card is adopted. Instead, the eight initial creators remain the
@@ -3419,16 +3419,16 @@
For all of their success, the creators of Cards Against Humanity
are only partially motivated by money. Max says they have always
been interested in the Walt Disney philosophy of financial
- success. “We don’t make jokes and games to make money—we
- make money so we can make more jokes and games,” he said.
+ success. âWe donât make jokes and games to make moneyâwe
+ make money so we can make more jokes and games,â he said.
In fact, the company has given more than $4 million to various
- charities and causes. “Cards is not our life plan,”
- Max said. “We all have other interests and hobbies. We are
+ charities and causes. âCards is not our life plan,â
+ Max said. âWe all have other interests and hobbies. We are
passionate about other things going on in our lives. A lot of the
activism we have done comes out of us taking things from the rest
of our lives and channeling some of the excitement from the game
- into it.”
+ into it.â
Seeing money as fuel rather than the ultimate goal is what has
enabled them to embrace Creative Commons licensing without
@@ -3436,12 +3436,12 @@
for the company, but nonetheless, giving up exclusive control of
your work necessarily means giving up some opportunities to
extract more money from customers.
- “It’s not right for everyone to release everything under CC
- licensing,” Max said. “If your only goal is to make a
+ âItâs not right for everyone to release everything under CC
+ licensing,â Max said. âIf your only goal is to make a
lot of money, then CC is not best strategy. This kind of business
model, though, speaks to your values, and who you are and why
- you’re making things.”
- Chapter 8. The Conversation| |
+ youâre making things.â
+ Chapter 8. The Conversation|  |
The Conversation is an independent source of news, sourced from
the academic and research community and delivered direct to the
public over the Internet. Founded in 2011 in Australia.
@@ -3454,7 +3454,7 @@
2016
Interviewee: Andrew Jaspan,
founder
- | | | | --\begin{flushright}
+ | Â | | Â | --\begin{flushright}
\textit{
Profile written by Paul Stacey
}
@@ -3464,7 +3464,7 @@
and the Age in Melbourne, Australia. He experienced firsthand the
decline of newspapers, including the collapse of revenues,
layoffs, and the constant pressure to reduce costs. After he left
- the Age in 2005, his concern for the future journalism didn’t go
+ the Age in 2005, his concern for the future journalism didnât go
away. Andrew made a commitment to come up with an alternative
model.
@@ -3474,21 +3474,21 @@
still an appetite for journalism with depth and substance but was
concerned about the increasing focus on the sensational and sexy.
- While at the Age, he’d become friends with a vice-chancellor of a
+ While at the Age, heâd become friends with a vice-chancellor of a
university in Melbourne who encouraged him to talk to smart people
- across campus—an astrophysicist, a Nobel laureate, earth
+ across campusâan astrophysicist, a Nobel laureate, earth
scientists, economists . . . These were the kind of smart people
he wished were more involved in informing the world about what is
going on and correcting the errors that appear in media. However,
they were reluctant to engage with mass media. Often, journalists
- didn’t understand what they said, or unilaterally chose what
+ didnât understand what they said, or unilaterally chose what
aspect of a story to tell, putting out a version that these people
felt was wrong or mischaracterized. Newspapers want to attract a
mass audience. Scholars want to communicate serious news,
- findings, and insights. It’s not a perfect match. Universities are
+ findings, and insights. Itâs not a perfect match. Universities are
massive repositories of knowledge, research, wisdom, and
expertise. But a lot of that stays behind a wall of their own
- making—there are the walled garden and ivory tower metaphors, and
+ makingâthere are the walled garden and ivory tower metaphors, and
in more literal terms, the paywall. Broadly speaking, universities
are part of society but disconnected from it. They are an enormous
public resource but not that good at presenting their expertise to
@@ -3501,7 +3501,7 @@
everything from story structure to headline, captions, and quotes.
The editors could help turn something that is academic into
something understandable and readable. And this would be a key
- difference from traditional journalism—the subject matter expert
+ difference from traditional journalismâthe subject matter expert
would get a chance to check the article and give final approval
before it is published. Compare this with reporters just picking
and choosing the quotes and writing whatever they want.
@@ -3520,9 +3520,9 @@
The Conversation is founded on the belief that underpinning a
functioning democracy is access to independent, high-quality,
- informative journalism. The Conversation’s aim is for people to
+ informative journalism. The Conversationâs aim is for people to
have a better understanding of current affairs and complex
- issues—and hopefully a better quality of public discourse. The
+ issuesâand hopefully a better quality of public discourse. The
Conversation sees itself as a source of trusted information
dedicated to the public good. Their core mission is simple: to
provide readers with a reliable source of evidence-based
@@ -3537,48 +3537,48 @@
comes from the university and research community, it still needs
to be fully disclosed. The Conversation does not sit behind a
paywall. Andrew believes access to information is an issue of
- equality—everyone should have access, like access to clean water.
+ equalityâeveryone should have access, like access to clean water.
The Conversation is committed to an open and free Internet.
Everyone should have free access to their content, and be able to
share it or republish it.
Creative Commons help with these goals; articles are published
- with the Attribution- NoDerivs license (CC BY-ND). They’re freely
+ with the Attribution- NoDerivs license (CC BY-ND). Theyâre freely
available for others to republish elsewhere as long as attribution
is given and the content is not edited. Over five years, more than
twenty-two thousand sites have republished their content. The
Conversation website gets about 2.9 million unique views per
month, but through republication they have thirty-five million
- readers. This couldn’t have been done without the Creative Commons
- license, and in Andrew’s view, Creative Commons is central to
+ readers. This couldnât have been done without the Creative Commons
+ license, and in Andrewâs view, Creative Commons is central to
everything the Conversation does.
When readers come across the Conversation, they seem to like what
they find and recommend it to their friends, peers, and networks.
Readership has grown primarily through word of mouth. While they
- don’t have sales and marketing, they do promote their work through
+ donât have sales and marketing, they do promote their work through
social media (including Twitter and Facebook), and by being an
accredited supplier to Google News.
- It’s usual for the founders of any company to ask themselves what
+ Itâs usual for the founders of any company to ask themselves what
kind of company it should be. It quickly became clear to the
founders of the Conversation that they wanted to create a public
good rather than make money off of information. Most media
companies are working to aggregate as many eyeballs as possible
- and sell ads. The Conversation founders didn’t want this model. It
+ and sell ads. The Conversation founders didnât want this model. It
takes no advertising and is a not-for-profit venture.
There are now different editions of the Conversation for Africa,
the United Kingdom, France, and the United States, in addition to
the one for Australia. All five editions have their own editorial
- mastheads, advisory boards, and content. The Conversation’s global
+ mastheads, advisory boards, and content. The Conversationâs global
virtual newsroom has roughly ninety staff working with thirty-five
thousand academics from over sixteen hundred universities around
the world. The Conversation would like to be working with
university scholars from even more parts of the world.
Additionally, each edition has its own set of founding partners,
- strategic partners, and funders. They’ve received funding from
+ strategic partners, and funders. Theyâve received funding from
foundations, corporates, institutions, and individual donations,
but the Conversation is shifting toward paid memberships by
universities and research institutions to sustain operations. This
@@ -3588,8 +3588,8 @@
When professors from member universities write an article, there
is some branding of the university associated with the article. On
the Conversation website, paying university members are listed as
- “members and funders.” Early participants may be
- designated as “founding members,” with seats on the
+ âmembers and funders.â Early participants may be
+ designated as âfounding members,â with seats on the
editorial advisory board.
Academics are not paid for their contributions, but they get free
@@ -3610,15 +3610,15 @@
These reach and impact metrics show the benefits of membership.
With the Conversation, universities can engage with the public and
- show why they’re of value.
+ show why theyâre of value.
- With its tagline, “Academic Rigor, Journalistic
- Flair,” the Conversation represents a new form of
+ With its tagline, âAcademic Rigor, Journalistic
+ Flair,â the Conversation represents a new form of
journalism that contributes to a more informed citizenry and
improved democracy around the world. Its open business model and
- use of Creative Commons show how it’s possible to generate both a
+ use of Creative Commons show how itâs possible to generate both a
public good and operational revenue at the same time.
- | |
+ Chapter 9. Cory Doctorow|  |
Cory Doctorow is a science fiction writer, activist, blogger,
and journalist. Based in the U.S.
http://craphound.com and
@@ -3628,18 +3628,18 @@
translation rights to books
Interview date: January 12,
2016
- | | | | --\begin{flushright}
+ | Â | | Â | --\begin{flushright}
\textit{
Profile written by Sarah Hinchliff Pearson
}
\end{flushright} |
- Cory Doctorow hates the term “business model,” and he
- is adamant that he is not a brand. “To me, branding is the
+ Cory Doctorow hates the term âbusiness model,â and he
+ is adamant that he is not a brand. âTo me, branding is the
idea that you can take a thing that has certain qualities, remove
- the qualities, and go on selling it,” he said. “I’m
- not out there trying to figure out how to be a brand. I’m doing
+ the qualities, and go on selling it,â he said. âIâm
+ not out there trying to figure out how to be a brand. Iâm doing
this thing that animates me to work crazy insane hours because
- it’s the most important thing I know how to do.”
+ itâs the most important thing I know how to do.â
Cory calls himself an entrepreneur. He likes to say his success
came from making stuff people happened to like and then getting
@@ -3651,7 +3651,7 @@
license. Cory is coeditor of the popular CC-licensed site Boing
Boing, where he writes about technology, politics, and
intellectual property. He has also written several nonfiction
- books, including the most recent Information Doesn’t Want to Be
+ books, including the most recent Information Doesnât Want to Be
Free, about the ways in which creators can make a living in the
Internet age.
@@ -3659,64 +3659,64 @@
takes on paid speaking gigs and is experimenting with
pay-what-you-want models for his work.
- While Cory’s extensive body of fiction work has a large following,
+ While Coryâs extensive body of fiction work has a large following,
he is just as well known for his activism. He is an outspoken
opponent of restrictive copyright and digital-rights-management
(DRM) technology used to lock up content because he thinks both
undermine creators and the public interest. He is currently a
special adviser at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, where he is
involved in a lawsuit challenging the U.S. law that protects DRM.
- Cory says his political work doesn’t directly make him money, but
+ Cory says his political work doesnât directly make him money, but
if he gave it up, he thinks he would lose credibility and, more
- importantly, lose the drive that propels him to create. “My
+ importantly, lose the drive that propels him to create. âMy
political work is a different expression of the same
- artistic-political urge,” he said. “I have this
- suspicion that if I gave up the things that didn’t make me money,
+ artistic-political urge,â he said. âI have this
+ suspicion that if I gave up the things that didnât make me money,
the genuineness would leach out of what I do, and the quality that
- causes people to like what I do would be gone.”
+ causes people to like what I do would be gone.â
Cory has been financially successful, but money is not his primary
- motivation. At the start of his book Information Doesn’t Want to
+ motivation. At the start of his book Information Doesnât Want to
Be Free, he stresses how important it is not to become an artist
- if your goal is to get rich. “Entering the arts because you
+ if your goal is to get rich. âEntering the arts because you
want to get rich is like buying lottery tickets because you want
- to get rich,” he wrote. “It might work, but it almost
- certainly won’t. Though, of course, someone always wins the
- lottery.” He acknowledges that he is one of the lucky few
- to “make it,” but he says he would be writing no
- matter what. “I am compelled to write,” he wrote.
- “Long before I wrote to keep myself fed and sheltered, I was
- writing to keep myself sane.”
+ to get rich,â he wrote. âIt might work, but it almost
+ certainly wonât. Though, of course, someone always wins the
+ lottery.â He acknowledges that he is one of the lucky few
+ to âmake it,â but he says he would be writing no
+ matter what. âI am compelled to write,â he wrote.
+ âLong before I wrote to keep myself fed and sheltered, I was
+ writing to keep myself sane.â
Just as money is not his primary motivation to create, money is
not his primary motivation to share. For Cory, sharing his work
- with Creative Commons is a moral imperative. “It felt
- morally right,” he said of his decision to adopt Creative
- Commons licenses. “I felt like I wasn’t contributing to the
+ with Creative Commons is a moral imperative. âIt felt
+ morally right,â he said of his decision to adopt Creative
+ Commons licenses. âI felt like I wasnât contributing to the
culture of surveillance and censorship that has been created to
- try to stop copying.” In other words, using CC licenses
+ try to stop copying.â In other words, using CC licenses
symbolizes his worldview.
He also feels like there is a solid commercial basis for licensing
- his work with Creative Commons. While he acknowledges he hasn’t
+ his work with Creative Commons. While he acknowledges he hasnât
been able to do a controlled experiment to compare the commercial
benefits of licensing with CC against reserving all rights, he
thinks he has sold more books using a CC license than he would
have without it. Cory says his goal is to convince people they
- should pay him for his work. “I started by not calling them
- thieves,” he said.
+ should pay him for his work. âI started by not calling them
+ thieves,â he said.
Cory started using CC licenses soon after they were first created.
At the time his first novel came out, he says the science fiction
genre was overrun with people scanning and downloading books
without permission. When he and his publisher took a closer look
at who was doing that sort of thing online, they realized it
- looked a lot like book promotion. “I knew there was a
+ looked a lot like book promotion. âI knew there was a
relationship between having enthusiastic readers and having a
- successful career as a writer,” he said. “At the
+ successful career as a writer,â he said. âAt the
time, it took eighty hours to OCR a book, which is a big effort. I
decided to spare them the time and energy, and give them the book
- for free in a format destined to spread.”
+ for free in a format destined to spread.â
Cory admits the stakes were pretty low for him when he first
adopted Creative Commons licenses. He only had to sell two
@@ -3728,23 +3728,23 @@
The bottom line, Cory says, is that no one has found a way to
prevent people from copying the stuff they like. Rather than
fighting the tide, Cory makes his work intrinsically shareable.
- “Getting the hell out of the way for people who want to
- share their love of you with other people sounds obvious, but it’s
- remarkable how many people don’t do it,” he said.
+ âGetting the hell out of the way for people who want to
+ share their love of you with other people sounds obvious, but itâs
+ remarkable how many people donât do it,â he said.
Making his work available under Creative Commons licenses enables
- him to view his biggest fans as his ambassadors. “Being open
+ him to view his biggest fans as his ambassadors. âBeing open
to fan activity makes you part of the conversation about what fans
- do with your work and how they interact with it,” he said.
- Cory’s own website routinely highlights cool things his audience
+ do with your work and how they interact with it,â he said.
+ Coryâs own website routinely highlights cool things his audience
has done with his work. Unlike corporations like Disney that tend
to have a hands-off relationship with their fan activity, he has a
- symbiotic relationship with his audience. “Engaging with
- your audience can’t guarantee you success,” he said.
- “And Disney is an example of being able to remain aloof and
+ symbiotic relationship with his audience. âEngaging with
+ your audience canât guarantee you success,â he said.
+ âAnd Disney is an example of being able to remain aloof and
still being the most successful company in the creative industry
in history. But I figure my likelihood of being Disney is pretty
- slim, so I should take all the help I can get.”
+ slim, so I should take all the help I can get.â
His first book was published under the most restrictive Creative
Commons license, Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs (CC BY-NC-ND).
@@ -3760,37 +3760,37 @@
is more difficult to get people to pay for translations if there
are fan translations already available for free.
- In his book Information Doesn’t Want to Be Free, Cory likens his
+ In his book Information Doesnât Want to Be Free, Cory likens his
philosophy to thinking like a dandelion. Dandelions produce
thousands of seeds each spring, and they are blown into the air
going in every direction. The strategy is to maximize the number
of blind chances the dandelion has for continuing its genetic
line. Similarly, he says there are lots of people out there who
may want to buy creative work or compensate authors for it in some
- other way. “The more places your work can find itself, the
+ other way. âThe more places your work can find itself, the
greater the likelihood that it will find one of those would-be
customers in some unsuspected crack in the metaphorical
- pavement,” he wrote. “The copies that others make of
- my work cost me nothing, and present the possibility that I’ll get
- something.”
+ pavement,â he wrote. âThe copies that others make of
+ my work cost me nothing, and present the possibility that Iâll get
+ something.â
Applying a CC license to his work increases the chances it will be
- shared more widely around the Web. He avoids DRM—and openly
- opposes the practice—for similar reasons. DRM has the effect of
+ shared more widely around the Web. He avoids DRMâand openly
+ opposes the practiceâfor similar reasons. DRM has the effect of
tying a work to a particular platform. This digital lock, in turn,
strips the authors of control over their own work and hands that
- control over to the platform. He calls it Cory’s First Law:
- “Anytime someone puts a lock on something that belongs to
- you and won’t give you the key, that lock isn’t there for your
- benefit.”
+ control over to the platform. He calls it Coryâs First Law:
+ âAnytime someone puts a lock on something that belongs to
+ you and wonât give you the key, that lock isnât there for your
+ benefit.â
Cory operates under the premise that artists benefit when there
are more, rather than fewer, places where people can access their
work. The Internet has opened up those avenues, but DRM is
- designed to limit them. “On the one hand, we can credibly
- make our work available to a widely dispersed audience,” he
- said. “On the other hand, the intermediaries we historically
- sold to are making it harder to go around them.” Cory
+ designed to limit them. âOn the one hand, we can credibly
+ make our work available to a widely dispersed audience,â he
+ said. âOn the other hand, the intermediaries we historically
+ sold to are making it harder to go around them.â Cory
continually looks for ways to reach his audience without relying
upon major platforms that will try to take control over his work.
@@ -3801,29 +3801,29 @@
for free, as long as it is easy to do. He was extremely successful
using Humble Bundle, a platform that allows people to pay what
they want for DRM-free versions of a bundle of a particular
- creator’s work. He is planning to try his own pay-what-you-want
+ creatorâs work. He is planning to try his own pay-what-you-want
experiment soon.
Fans are particularly willing to pay when they feel personally
connected to the artist. Cory works hard to create that personal
connection. One way he does this is by personally answering every
- single email he gets. “If you look at the history of
- artists, most die in penury,” he said. “That reality
+ single email he gets. âIf you look at the history of
+ artists, most die in penury,â he said. âThat reality
means that for artists, we have to find ways to support ourselves
when public tastes shift, when copyright stops producing.
Future-proofing your artistic career in many ways means figuring
out how to stay connected to those people who have been touched by
- your work.”
+ your work.â
- Cory’s realism about the difficulty of making a living in the arts
+ Coryâs realism about the difficulty of making a living in the arts
does not reflect pessimism about the Internet age. Instead, he
says the fact that it is hard to make a living as an artist is
- nothing new. What is new, he writes in his book, “is how
+ nothing new. What is new, he writes in his book, âis how
many ways there are to make things, and to get them into other
- people’s hands and minds.”
+ peopleâs hands and minds.â
It has never been easier to think like a dandelion.
- | |
+ | Â |
Figshare is a for-profit company offering an online repository
where researchers can preserve and share the output of their
research, including figures, data sets, images, and videos.
@@ -3836,23 +3836,23 @@
2016
Interviewee: Mark Hahnel,
founder
- | | | | --\begin{flushright}
+ | Â | | Â | --\begin{flushright}
\textit{
Profile written by Paul Stacey
}
\end{flushright} |
- Figshare’s mission is to change the face of academic publishing
+ Figshareâs mission is to change the face of academic publishing
through improved dissemination, discoverability, and reusability
of scholarly research. Figshare is a repository where users can
- make all the output of their research available—from posters and
- presentations to data sets and code—in a way that’s easy to
+ make all the output of their research availableâfrom posters and
+ presentations to data sets and codeâin a way thatâs easy to
discover, cite, and share. Users can upload any file format, which
can then be previewed in a Web browser. Research output is
disseminated in a way that the current scholarly-publishing model
does not allow.
Figshare founder Mark Hahnel often gets asked: How do you make
- money? How do we know you’ll be here in five years? Can you, as a
+ money? How do we know youâll be here in five years? Can you, as a
for-profit venture, be trusted? Answers have evolved over time.
Mark traces the origins of Figshare back to when he was a graduate
@@ -3870,12 +3870,12 @@
working on a solution.
There were two key needs: licenses to make the data citable, and
- persistent identifiers— URL links that always point back to the
+ persistent identifiersâ URL links that always point back to the
original object ensuring the research is citable for the long
term.
Mark chose Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs) to meet the need for
- a persistent identifier. In the DOI system, an object’s metadata
+ a persistent identifier. In the DOI system, an objectâs metadata
is stored as a series of numbers in the DOI name. Referring to an
object by its DOI is more stable than referring to it by its URL,
because the location of an object (the web page or URL) can often
@@ -3885,7 +3885,7 @@
As for licenses, Mark chose Creative Commons. The open-access and
open-science communities were already using and recommending
Creative Commons. Based on what was happening in those communities
- and Mark’s dialogue with peers, he went with CC0 (in the public
+ and Markâs dialogue with peers, he went with CC0 (in the public
domain) for data sets and CC BY (Attribution) for figures, videos,
and data sets.
@@ -3914,9 +3914,9 @@
storage space, and for private online space designed for a set
number of research collaborators, which is ideal for larger teams
and geographically dispersed research groups. Figshare sums up its
- value proposition to researchers as “You retain ownership.
+ value proposition to researchers as âYou retain ownership.
You license it. You get credit. We just make sure it
- persists.”
+ persists.â
In January 2012, Figshare was launched. (The fig in Figshare
stands for figures.) Using investment funds, Mark made significant
@@ -3929,12 +3929,12 @@
Figshare diversified its business model to include services for
journals. Figshare began hosting large amounts of data for the
- journals’ online articles. This additional data improved the
+ journalsâ online articles. This additional data improved the
quality of the articles. Outsourcing this service to Figshare
freed publishers from having to develop this functionality as part
of their own infrastructure. Figshare-hosted data also provides a
link back to the article, generating additional click-through and
- readership—a benefit to both journal publishers and researchers.
+ readershipâa benefit to both journal publishers and researchers.
Figshare now provides research-data infrastructure for a wide
variety of publishers including Wiley, Springer Nature, PLOS, and
Taylor and Francis, to name a few, and has convinced them to use
@@ -3954,7 +3954,7 @@
for Institutions) that securely hosts research data of
institutions in the cloud. Services include not just hosting but
data metrics, data dissemination, and user-group administration.
- Figshare’s workflow, and the services they offer for institutions,
+ Figshareâs workflow, and the services they offer for institutions,
take into account the needs of librarians and administrators, as
well as of the researchers.
@@ -3973,7 +3973,7 @@
For Mark this created a conflict. On the one hand, the principles
and benefits of open science are at the heart of Figshare, and
Mark believes CC BY is the best license for this. On the other
- hand, institutions were saying they wouldn’t use Figshare unless
+ hand, institutions were saying they wouldnât use Figshare unless
it offered a choice in licenses. He initially refused to offer
anything beyond CC0 and CC BY, but after seeing an open-source
CERN project offer all Creative Commons licenses without any
@@ -3991,7 +3991,7 @@
applications. As an example, Mark shared a Figshare data set
showing the journal subscriptions that higher-education
institutions in the United Kingdom paid to ten major
- publishers. Figshare’s API enables that data to be pulled into an
+ publishers. Figshareâs API enables that data to be pulled into an
app developed by a completely different researcher that converts
the data into a visually interesting graph, which any viewer can
alter by changing any of the variables.
@@ -4008,17 +4008,17 @@
Mark says his success is partly about being in the right place at
the right time. He also believes that the diversification of
- Figshare’s model over time has been key to success. Figshare now
+ Figshareâs model over time has been key to success. Figshare now
offers a comprehensive set of services to researchers, publishers,
and institutions. If he had relied solely on revenue from premium
subscriptions, he believes Figshare would have struggled. In
- Figshare’s early days, their primary users were early-career and
+ Figshareâs early days, their primary users were early-career and
late-career academics. It has only been because funders mandated
open licensing that Figshare is now being used by the mainstream.
- Today Figshare has 26 million–plus page views, 7.5 million–plus
- downloads, 800,000–plus user uploads, 2 million–plus articles,
- 500,000-plus collections, and 5,000–plus projects. Sixty percent
+ Today Figshare has 26 millionâplus page views, 7.5 millionâplus
+ downloads, 800,000âplus user uploads, 2 millionâplus articles,
+ 500,000-plus collections, and 5,000âplus projects. Sixty percent
of their traffic comes from Google. A sister company called
Altmetric tracks the use of Figshare by others, including
Wikipedia and news sources.
@@ -4026,16 +4026,16 @@
Figshare uses the revenue it generates from the premium
subscribers, journal publishers, and institutions to fund and
expand what it can offer to researchers for free. Figshare has
- publicly stuck to its principles—keeping the free service free and
- requiring the use of CC BY and CC0 from the start—and from Mark’s
+ publicly stuck to its principlesâkeeping the free service free and
+ requiring the use of CC BY and CC0 from the startâand from Markâs
perspective, this is why people trust Figshare. Mark sees new
competitors coming forward who are just in it for money. If
- Figshare was only in it for the money, they wouldn’t care about
- offering a free version. Figshare’s principles and advocacy for
+ Figshare was only in it for the money, they wouldnât care about
+ offering a free version. Figshareâs principles and advocacy for
openness are a key differentiator. Going forward, Mark sees
Figshare not only as supporting open access to research but also
enabling people to collaborate and make new discoveries.
- | |
+ | Â |
Figure.NZ is a nonprofit charity that makes an online data
platform designed to make data reusable and easy to understand.
Founded in 2012 in New Zealand.
@@ -4046,7 +4046,7 @@
Interview date: May 3, 2016
Interviewee: Lillian Grace,
founder
- | | | | --\begin{flushright}
+ | Â | | Â | --\begin{flushright}
\textit{
Profile written by Paul Stacey
}
@@ -4054,12 +4054,12 @@
In the paper Harnessing the Economic and Social Power of Data
presented at the New Zealand Data Futures Forum in 2014, Figure.NZ founder Lillian Grace said there are
thousands of valuable and relevant data sets freely available to
- us right now, but most people don’t use them. She used to think
- this meant people didn’t care about being informed, but she’s come
+ us right now, but most people donât use them. She used to think
+ this meant people didnât care about being informed, but sheâs come
to see that she was wrong. Almost everyone wants to be informed
- about issues that matter—not only to them, but also to their
+ about issues that matterânot only to them, but also to their
families, their communities, their businesses, and their country.
- But there’s a big difference between availability and
+ But thereâs a big difference between availability and
accessibility of information. Data is spread across thousands of
sites and is held within databases and spreadsheets that require
both time and skill to engage with. To use data when making a
@@ -4074,9 +4074,9 @@
improving economic prosperity, social well-being, environmental
quality, and environmental productivity for New Zealand and New
Zealanders. While giving talks to community and business groups,
- Lillian realized “every single issue we addressed would have
+ Lillian realized âevery single issue we addressed would have
been easier to deal with if more people understood the basic
- facts.” But understanding the basic facts sometimes
+ facts.â But understanding the basic facts sometimes
requires data and research that you often have to pay for.
Lillian began to imagine a website that lifted data up to a visual
@@ -4085,17 +4085,17 @@
people could contribute their data and visuals via a wiki.
However, few people had graphs that could be used and shared, and
there were no standards or consistency around the data and the
- visuals. Realizing the wiki model wasn’t working, Lillian brought
+ visuals. Realizing the wiki model wasnât working, Lillian brought
the process of data aggregation, curation, and visual presentation
in-house, and invested in the technology to help automate some of
it. Wiki New Zealand became Figure.NZ, and efforts were reoriented
toward providing services to those wanting to open their data and
present it visually.
- Here’s how it works. Figure.NZ sources data from other
+ Hereâs how it works. Figure.NZ sources data from other
organizations, including corporations, public repositories,
government departments, and academics. Figure.NZ imports and
- extracts that data, and then validates and standardizes it—all
+ extracts that data, and then validates and standardizes itâall
with a strong eye on what will be best for users. They then make
the data available in a series of standardized forms, both human-
and machine-readable, with rich metadata about the sources, the
@@ -4113,26 +4113,26 @@
colleague. Lillian spent time looking at what Creative Commons
offered and thought it looked good, was clear, and made common
sense. It was easy to use and easy for others to understand. Over
- time, she’s come to realize just how fortunate and important that
- decision turned out to be. New Zealand’s government has an
+ time, sheâs come to realize just how fortunate and important that
+ decision turned out to be. New Zealandâs government has an
open-access and licensing framework called NZGOAL, which provides
guidance for agencies when they release copyrighted and
noncopyrighted work and material. It aims to standardize the licensing of works with
government copyright and how they can be reused, and it does this
with Creative Commons licenses. As a result, 98 percent of all
government-agency data is Creative Commons licensed, fitting in
- nicely with Figure.NZ’s decision.
+ nicely with Figure.NZâs decision.
Lillian thinks current ideas of what a business is are relatively
- new, only a hundred years old or so. She’s convinced that twenty
+ new, only a hundred years old or so. Sheâs convinced that twenty
years from now, we will see new and different models for business.
Figure.NZ is set up as a nonprofit charity. It is purpose-driven
but also strives to pay people well and thinks like a business.
Lillian sees the charity-nonprofit status as an essential element
for the mission and purpose of Figure.NZ. She believes Wikipedia
- would not work if it were for profit, and similarly, Figure.NZ’s
+ would not work if it were for profit, and similarly, Figure.NZâs
nonprofit status assures people who have data and people who want
- to use it that they can rely on Figure.NZ’s motives. People see
+ to use it that they can rely on Figure.NZâs motives. People see
them as a trusted wrangler and source.
Although Figure.NZ is a social enterprise that openly licenses
@@ -4161,13 +4161,13 @@
Figure.NZ has multiple lines of business. They provide commercial
services to organizations that want their data publicly available
and want to use Figure.NZ as their publishing platform. People who
- want to publish open data appreciate Figure.NZ’s ability to do it
+ want to publish open data appreciate Figure.NZâs ability to do it
faster, more easily, and better than they can. Customers are
encouraged to help their users find, use, and make things from the
- data they make available on Figure.NZ’s website. Customers control
+ data they make available on Figure.NZâs website. Customers control
what is released and the license terms (although Figure.NZ
encourages Creative Commons licensing). Figure.NZ also serves
- customers who want a specific collection of charts created—for
+ customers who want a specific collection of charts createdâfor
example, for their website or annual report. Charging the
organizations that want to make their data available enables
Figure.NZ to provide their site free to all users, to truly
@@ -4178,16 +4178,16 @@
sometimes makes it difficult for customers and Figure.NZ to figure
out what it would cost to import, standardize, and display that
data in a useful way. To deal with this, Figure.NZ uses
- “high-trust contracts,” where customers allocate a
+ âhigh-trust contracts,â where customers allocate a
certain budget to the task that Figure.NZ is then free to draw
- from, as long as Figure.NZ frequently reports on what they’ve
+ from, as long as Figure.NZ frequently reports on what theyâve
produced so the customer can determine the value for money. This
strategy has helped build trust and transparency about the level
of effort associated with doing work that has never been done
before.
A second line of business is what Figure.NZ calls partners. ASB
- Bank and Statistics New Zealand are partners who back Figure.NZ’s
+ Bank and Statistics New Zealand are partners who back Figure.NZâs
efforts. As one example, with their support Figure.NZ has been
able to create Business Figures, a special way for businesses to
find useful data without having to know what questions to
@@ -4208,13 +4208,13 @@
developed a deep expertise in taking random styles of data,
standardizing it, and making it useful. Lillian realized that
Figure.NZ could easily become a warehouse of seventy people doing
- data. But for Lillian, growth isn’t always good. In her view,
+ data. But for Lillian, growth isnât always good. In her view,
bigger often means less effective. Lillian set artificial
constraints on growth, forcing the organization to think
differently and be more efficient. Rather than in-house growth,
they are growing and building external relationships.
- Figure.NZ’s website displays visuals and data associated with a
+ Figure.NZâs website displays visuals and data associated with a
wide range of categories including crime, economy, education,
employment, energy, environment, health, information and
communications technology, industry, tourism, and many others. A
@@ -4225,14 +4225,14 @@
Figure.NZ believes data and visuals should be useful. They provide
their customers with a data collection template and teach them why
- it’s important and how to use it. They’ve begun putting more
+ itâs important and how to use it. Theyâve begun putting more
emphasis on tracking what users of their website want. They also
get requests from social media and through email for them to share
- data for a specific topic—for example, can you share data for
+ data for a specific topicâfor example, can you share data for
water quality? If they have the data, they respond quickly; if
- they don’t, they try and identify the organizations that would
+ they donât, they try and identify the organizations that would
have that data and forge a relationship so they can be included on
- Figure.NZ’s site. Overall, Figure.NZ is seeking to provide a place
+ Figure.NZâs site. Overall, Figure.NZ is seeking to provide a place
for people to be curious about, access, and interpret data on
topics they are interested in.
@@ -4245,47 +4245,47 @@
behalf of others, whether it was on behalf of a country or
companies.
- "But now we live in a world where it’s really easy to share
+ "But now we live in a world where itâs really easy to share
information widely and also to communicate widely. In the world we
live in now, the best future is the one where everyone can make
well-informed decisions.
"The use of numbers and data as a way of making well-informed
decisions is one of the areas where there is the biggest gaps. We
- don’t really use numbers as a part of our thinking and part of our
+ donât really use numbers as a part of our thinking and part of our
understanding yet.
"Part of the reason is the way data is spread across hundreds
of sites. In addition, for the most part, deep thinking based on
- data is constrained to experts because most people don’t have data
+ data is constrained to experts because most people donât have data
literacy. There once was a time when many citizens in society
- couldn’t read or write. However, as a society, we’ve now come to
+ couldnât read or write. However, as a society, weâve now come to
believe that reading and writing skills should be something all
- citizens have. We haven’t yet adopted a similar belief around
+ citizens have. We havenât yet adopted a similar belief around
numbers and data literacy. We largely still believe that only a
few specially trained people can analyze and think with numbers.
"Figure.NZ may be the first organization to assert that
- everyone can use numbers in their thinking, and it’s built a
+ everyone can use numbers in their thinking, and itâs built a
technological platform along with trust and a network of
relationships to make that possible. What you can see on Figure.NZ
are tens of thousands of graphs, maps, and data.
- “Figure.NZ sees this as a new kind of alphabet that can help
+ âFigure.NZ sees this as a new kind of alphabet that can help
people analyze what they see around them. A way to be thoughtful
and informed about society. A means of engaging in conversation
and shaping decision making that transcends personal experience.
The long-term value and impact is almost impossible to measure,
but the goal is to help citizens gain understanding and work
- together in more informed ways to shape the future.”
+ together in more informed ways to shape the future.â
- Lillian sees Figure.NZ’s model as having global potential. But for
+ Lillian sees Figure.NZâs model as having global potential. But for
now, their focus is completely on making Figure.NZ work in New
- Zealand and to get the “network effect”— users
+ Zealand and to get the ânetwork effectââ users
dramatically increasing value for themselves and for others
through use of their service. Creative Commons is core to making
the network effect possible.
- Chapter 12. Knowledge Unlatched| |
+ Chapter 12. Knowledge Unlatched|  |
Knowledge Unlatched is a not-for-profit community interest
company that brings libraries together to pool funds to publish
open-access books. Founded in 2012 in the UK.
@@ -4297,12 +4297,12 @@
2016
Interviewee: Frances Pinter,
founder
- | | | | --\begin{flushright}
+ | Â | | Â | --\begin{flushright}
\textit{
Profile written by Paul Stacey
}
\end{flushright} |
- The serial entrepreneur Dr. Frances Pinter has been at the
+ The serial entrepreneur Dr. Frances Pinter has been at the
forefront of innovation in the publishing industry for nearly
forty years. She founded the UK-based Knowledge Unlatched with a
mission to enable open access to scholarly books. For Frances, the
@@ -4317,7 +4317,7 @@
Open Access award in 2014 and a Curtin University Commercial
Innovation Award for Innovation in Education in 2015.
- Dr. Pinter has been in academic publishing most of her career.
+ Dr. Pinter has been in academic publishing most of her career.
About ten years ago, she became acquainted with the Creative
Commons founder Lawrence Lessig and got interested in Creative
Commons as a tool for both protecting content online and
@@ -4341,33 +4341,33 @@
associated with getting the book to print would be lost.
Surprisingly, Bloomsbury found that sales of the print versions of
these books were 10 to 20 percent higher than normal. Frances
- found it intriguing that the Creative Commons–licensed free online
+ found it intriguing that the Creative Commonsâlicensed free online
book acts as a marketing vehicle for the print format.
Frances began to look at customer interest in the three forms of
- the book: 1) the Creative Commons–licensed free online book in PDF
+ the book: 1) the Creative Commonsâlicensed free online book in PDF
form, 2) the printed book, and 3) a digital version of the book on
an aggregator platform with enhanced features. She thought of this
- as the “ice cream model”: the free PDF was vanilla
+ as the âice cream modelâ: the free PDF was vanilla
ice cream, the printed book was an ice cream cone, and the
enhanced e-book was an ice cream sundae.
- After a while, Frances had an epiphany—what if there was a way to
+ After a while, Frances had an epiphanyâwhat if there was a way to
get libraries to underwrite the costs of making these books up
- until they’re ready be printed, in other words, cover the fixed
+ until theyâre ready be printed, in other words, cover the fixed
costs of getting to the first digital copy? Then you could either
bring down the cost of the printed book, or do a whole bunch of
- interesting things with the printed book and e-book—the ice cream
+ interesting things with the printed book and e-bookâthe ice cream
cone or sundae part of the model.
This idea is similar to the article-processing charge some
open-access journals charge researchers to cover publishing costs.
Frances began to imagine a coalition of libraries paying for the
- prepress costs—a “book-processing charge”—and
+ prepress costsâa âbook-processing chargeââand
providing everyone in the world with an open-access version of the
books released under a Creative Commons license.
- This idea really took hold in her mind. She didn’t really have a
+ This idea really took hold in her mind. She didnât really have a
name for it but began talking about it and making presentations to
see if there was interest. The more she talked about it, the more
people agreed it had appeal. She offered a bottle of champagne to
@@ -4446,7 +4446,7 @@
cost per book was just under fifty dollars. The unlatching process
took roughly ten months. It started with a call to publishers for
titles, followed by having a library task force select the titles,
- getting authors’ permissions, getting the libraries to pledge,
+ getting authorsâ permissions, getting the libraries to pledge,
billing the libraries, and finally, unlatching.
The longest part of the whole process is getting libraries to
@@ -4474,14 +4474,14 @@
The cost for the publisher to get to a first digital copy of a
monograph is $5,000 to $50,000. A good one costs in the $10,000 to
- $15,000 range. Monographs typically don’t sell a lot of copies. A
+ $15,000 range. Monographs typically donât sell a lot of copies. A
publisher who in the past sold three thousand copies now typically
sells only three hundred. That makes unlatching monographs a low
risk for publishers. For the first round, it took five months to
get thirteen publishers. For the second round, it took one month
to get twenty-six.
- Authors don’t generally make a lot of royalties from monographs.
+ Authors donât generally make a lot of royalties from monographs.
Royalties range from zero dollars to 5 to 10 percent of receipts.
The value to the author is the awareness it brings to them; when
their book is being read, it increases their reputation. Open
@@ -4514,7 +4514,7 @@
nonparticipating libraries could be seen as free riders, in the
library world, wealthy libraries are used to paying more than poor
libraries and accept that part of their money should be spent to
- support open access. “Free ride” is more like
+ support open access. âFree rideâ is more like
community responsibility. By the end of March 2016, the round-one
books had been downloaded nearly eighty thousand times in 175
countries.
@@ -4522,10 +4522,10 @@
For publishers, authors, and librarians, the Knowledge Unlatched
model for monographs is a win-win-win.
- In the first round, Knowledge Unlatched’s overheads were covered
+ In the first round, Knowledge Unlatchedâs overheads were covered
by grants. In the second round, they aim to demonstrate the model
is sustainable. Libraries and publishers will each pay a 7.5
- percent service charge that will go toward Knowledge Unlatched’s
+ percent service charge that will go toward Knowledge Unlatchedâs
running costs. With plans to scale up in future rounds, Frances
figures they can fully recover costs when they are unlatching two
hundred books at a time. Moving forward, Knowledge Unlatched is
@@ -4533,7 +4533,7 @@
include unlatching journals and older books.
Frances believes that Knowledge Unlatched is tapping into new ways
- of valuing academic content. It’s about considering how many
+ of valuing academic content. Itâs about considering how many
people can find, access, and use your content without pay
barriers. Knowledge Unlatched taps into the new possibilities and
behaviors of the digital world. In the Knowledge Unlatched model,
@@ -4541,7 +4541,7 @@
been, but the economics are different. For Frances, Knowledge
Unlatched is connected to the past but moving into the future, an
evolution rather than a revolution.
- Chapter 13. Lumen Learning| |
+ Chapter 13. Lumen Learning|  |
Lumen Learning is a for-profit company helping educational
institutions use open educational resources (OER). Founded in
2013 in the U.S.
@@ -4553,12 +4553,12 @@
2015
Interviewees: David Wiley and
Kim Thanos, cofounders
- | | | | --\begin{flushright}
+ | Â | | Â | --\begin{flushright}
\textit{
Profile written by Paul Stacey
}
\end{flushright} |
- Cofounded by open education visionary Dr. David Wiley and
+ Cofounded by open education visionary Dr. David Wiley and
education-technology strategist Kim Thanos, Lumen Learning is
dedicated to improving student success, bringing new ideas to
pedagogy, and making education more affordable by facilitating
@@ -4582,16 +4582,16 @@
David and Kim went back and forth on whether it should be a
nonprofit or for- profit. A nonprofit would make it a more
- comfortable fit with the education sector but meant they’d be
+ comfortable fit with the education sector but meant theyâd be
constantly fund-raising and seeking grants from philanthropies.
Also, grants usually require money to be used in certain ways for
specific deliverables. If you learn things along the way that
change how you think the grant money should be used, there often
- isn’t a lot of flexibility to do so.
+ isnât a lot of flexibility to do so.
- But as a for-profit, they’d have to convince educational
+ But as a for-profit, theyâd have to convince educational
institutions to pay for what Lumen had to offer. On the positive
- side, they’d have more control over what to do with the revenue
+ side, theyâd have more control over what to do with the revenue
and investment money; they could make decisions to invest the
funds or use them differently based on the situation and shifting
opportunities. In the end, they chose the for-profit status, with
@@ -4607,21 +4607,21 @@
Originally, Lumen did custom contracts for each institution. This
was complicated and challenging to manage. However, through that
process patterns emerged which allowed them to generalize a set of
- approaches and offerings. Today they don’t customize as much as
+ approaches and offerings. Today they donât customize as much as
they used to, and instead they tend to work with customers who can
use their off-the-shelf options. Lumen finds that institutions and
faculty are generally very good at seeing the value Lumen brings
and are willing to pay for it. Serving disadvantaged learner
populations has led Lumen to be very pragmatic; they describe what
- they offer in quantitative terms—with facts and figures—and in a
+ they offer in quantitative termsâwith facts and figuresâand in a
way that is very student-focused. Lumen Learning helps colleges
- and universities—
+ and universitiesâ
replace expensive textbooks in high-enrollment courses with
OER;
- provide enrolled students day one access to Lumen’s fully
- customizable OER course materials through the institution’s
+ provide enrolled students day one access to Lumenâs fully
+ customizable OER course materials through the institutionâs
learning-management system;
measure improvements in student success with metrics like
@@ -4630,7 +4630,7 @@
collaborate with faculty to make ongoing improvements to OER
based on student success research.
- Lumen has developed a suite of open, Creative Commons–licensed
+ Lumen has developed a suite of open, Creative Commonsâlicensed
courseware in more than sixty-five subjects. All courses are
freely and publicly available right off their website. They can be
copied and used by others as long as they provide attribution to
@@ -4639,7 +4639,7 @@
Then there are three types of bundled services that cost money.
One option, which Lumen calls Candela courseware, offers
- integration with the institution’s learning-management system,
+ integration with the institutionâs learning-management system,
technical and pedagogical support, and tracking of effectiveness.
Candela courseware costs institutions ten dollars per enrolled
student.
@@ -4661,7 +4661,7 @@
Lumen generates revenue by charging for their value-added tools
and services on top of their free courses, just as solar-power
companies provide the tools and services that help people use a
- free resource—sunlight. And Lumen’s business model focuses on
+ free resourceâsunlight. And Lumenâs business model focuses on
getting the institutions to pay, not the students. With projects
they did prior to Lumen, David and Kim learned that students who
have access to all course materials from day one have greater
@@ -4669,7 +4669,7 @@
access to those who paid. Right from the start, their stance was
that they would not put their content behind a paywall. Lumen
invests zero dollars in technologies and processes for restricting
- access—no digital rights management, no time bombs. While this has
+ accessâno digital rights management, no time bombs. While this has
been a challenge from a business-model perspective, from an
open-access perspective, it has generated immense goodwill in the
community.
@@ -4677,10 +4677,10 @@
In most cases, development of their courses is funded by the
institution Lumen has a contract with. When creating new courses,
Lumen typically works with the faculty who are teaching the new
- course. They’re often part of the institution paying Lumen, but
+ course. Theyâre often part of the institution paying Lumen, but
sometimes Lumen has to expand the team and contract faculty from
other institutions. First, the faculty identifies all of the
- course’s learning outcomes. Lumen then searches for, aggregates,
+ courseâs learning outcomes. Lumen then searches for, aggregates,
and curates the best OER they can find that addresses those
learning needs, which the faculty reviews.
@@ -4692,17 +4692,17 @@
their progress are areas where new content is frequently needed.
Once a course is created, Lumen puts it on their platform with all
the attributions and links to the original sources intact, and any
- of Lumen’s new content is given an Attribution (CC BY) license.
+ of Lumenâs new content is given an Attribution (CC BY) license.
Using only OER made them experience firsthand how complex it could
be to mix differently licensed work together. A common strategy
with OER is to place the Creative Commons license and attribution
- information in the website’s footer, which stays the same for all
- pages. This doesn’t quite work, however, when mixing different OER
+ information in the websiteâs footer, which stays the same for all
+ pages. This doesnât quite work, however, when mixing different OER
together.
Remixing OER often results in multiple attributions on every page
- of every course—text from one place, images from another, and
+ of every courseâtext from one place, images from another, and
videos from yet another. Some are licensed as Attribution (CC BY),
others as Attribution-ShareAlike (CC BY-SA). If this information
is put within the text of the course, faculty members sometimes
@@ -4711,15 +4711,15 @@
information as metadata, and getting it to show up at the end of
each page.
- Lumen’s commitment to open licensing and helping low-income
+ Lumenâs commitment to open licensing and helping low-income
students has led to strong relationships with institutions,
open-education enthusiasts, and grant funders. People in their
network generously increase the visibility of Lumen through
presentations, word of mouth, and referrals. Sometimes the number
- of general inquiries exceed Lumen’s sales capacity.
+ of general inquiries exceed Lumenâs sales capacity.
To manage demand and ensure the success of projects, their
- strategy is to be proactive and focus on what’s going on in higher
+ strategy is to be proactive and focus on whatâs going on in higher
education in different regions of the United States, watching out
for things happening at the system level in a way that fits with
what Lumen offers. A great example is the Virginia community
@@ -4727,11 +4727,11 @@
there are nine other U.S. states with similar system-level
activity where Lumen is strategically focusing its efforts. Where
there are projects that would require a lot of resources on
- Lumen’s part, they prioritize the ones that would impact the
+ Lumenâs part, they prioritize the ones that would impact the
largest number of students.
As a business, Lumen is committed to openness. There are two core
- nonnegotiables: Lumen’s use of CC BY, the most permissive of the
+ nonnegotiables: Lumenâs use of CC BY, the most permissive of the
Creative Commons licenses, for all the materials it creates; and
day-one access for students. Having clear nonnegotiables allows
them to then engage with the education community to solve for
@@ -4739,7 +4739,7 @@
business models that achieve institution goals, while keeping
Lumen healthy.
- Openness also means that Lumen’s OER must necessarily be
+ Openness also means that Lumenâs OER must necessarily be
nonexclusive and nonrivalrous. This represents several big
challenges for the business model: Why should you invest in
creating something that people will be reluctant to pay for? How
@@ -4761,7 +4761,7 @@
estimate of how much their students are saving and encouraging
them to switch to a paid model. Lumen explains the advantages of
the paid model: a more interactive relationship with Lumen;
- integration with the institution’s learning-management system; a
+ integration with the institutionâs learning-management system; a
guarantee of support for faculty and students; and future
sustainability with funding supporting the evolution and
improvement of the OER they are using.
@@ -4775,7 +4775,7 @@
balance of all these factors.
Licensing all the content they produce with CC BY is a key part of
- giving more value than they take. They’ve also worked hard at
+ giving more value than they take. Theyâve also worked hard at
finding the right structure for their value-add and how to package
it in a way that is understandable and repeatable.
@@ -4790,17 +4790,17 @@
funded with angel capital. Going forward, their strategy is to
replace grant funding with revenue.
- In creating Lumen Learning, David and Kim say they’ve landed on
+ In creating Lumen Learning, David and Kim say theyâve landed on
solutions they never imagined, and there is still a lot of
learning taking place. For them, open business models are an
emerging field where we are all learning through sharing. Their
biggest recommendations for others wanting to pursue the open
model are to make your commitment to open resources public, let
- people know where you stand, and don’t back away from it. It
+ people know where you stand, and donât back away from it. It
really is about trust.
- Chapter 14. Jonathan Mann| |
+ Chapter 14. Jonathan Mann|  |
Jonathan Mann is a singer and songwriter who is most well known
- as the “Song A Day” guy. Based in the U.S.
+ as the âSong A Dayâ guy. Based in the U.S.
http://jonathanmann.net and
http://jonathanmann.bandcamp.com
Revenue model: charging for
@@ -4809,13 +4809,13 @@
engagements and musical performances)
Interview date: February 22,
2016
- | | | | --\begin{flushright}
+ | Â | | Â | --\begin{flushright}
\textit{
Profile written by Sarah Hinchliff Pearson
}
\end{flushright} |
Jonathan Mann thinks of his business model as
- “hustling”—seizing nearly every opportunity he sees
+ âhustlingââseizing nearly every opportunity he sees
to make money. The bulk of his income comes from writing songs
under commission for people and companies, but he has a wide
variety of income sources. He has supporters on the crowdfunding
@@ -4835,14 +4835,14 @@
conference. The song then went viral, and the experience landed
him in Time magazine.
- Jonathan’s successful “hustling” is also about
+ Jonathanâs successful âhustlingâ is also about
old-fashioned persistence. He is currently in his eighth straight
year of writing one song each day. He holds the Guinness World
Record for consecutive daily songwriting, and he is widely known
- as the “song-a-day guy.”
+ as the âsong-a-day guy.â
He fell into this role by, naturally, seizing a random opportunity
- a friend alerted him to seven years ago—an event called Fun-A-Day,
+ a friend alerted him to seven years agoâan event called Fun-A-Day,
where people are supposed to create a piece of art every day for
thirty-one days straight. He was in need of a new project, so he
decided to give it a try by writing and posting a song each day.
@@ -4854,7 +4854,7 @@
he decided to see if he could continue it for one year. He never
stopped. He has written and posted a new song literally every day,
seven days a week, since he began the project in 2009. When he
- isn’t writing songs that he is hired to write by clients, he
+ isnât writing songs that he is hired to write by clients, he
writes songs about whatever is on his mind that day. His songs are
catchy and mostly lighthearted, but they often contain at least an
undercurrent of a deeper theme or meaning. Occasionally, they are
@@ -4873,51 +4873,51 @@
there were more people wanting him to write songs for them. Today
he earns most of his money this way.
- His website explains his gig as “taking any message, from
+ His website explains his gig as âtaking any message, from
the super simple to the totally complicated, and conveying that
- message through a heartfelt, fun and quirky song.” He
+ message through a heartfelt, fun and quirky song.â He
charges $500 to create a produced song and $300 for an acoustic
song. He has been hired for product launches, weddings,
conferences, and even Kickstarter campaigns like the one that
funded the production of this book.
- Jonathan can’t recall when exactly he first learned about Creative
+ Jonathan canât recall when exactly he first learned about Creative
Commons, but he began applying CC licenses to his songs and videos
- as soon as he discovered the option. “CC seems like such a
- no-brainer,” Jonathan said. “I don’t understand how
+ as soon as he discovered the option. âCC seems like such a
+ no-brainer,â Jonathan said. âI donât understand how
anything else would make sense. It seems like such an obvious
thing that you would want your work to be able to be
- shared.”
+ shared.â
His songs are essentially marketing for his services, so obviously
the further his songs spread, the better. Using CC licenses helps
grease the wheels, letting people know that Jonathan allows and
encourages them to copy, interact with, and remix his music.
- “If you let someone cover your song or remix it or use parts
- of it, that’s how music is supposed to work,” Jonathan
- said. “That is how music has worked since the beginning of
- time. Our me-me, mine-mine culture has undermined that.”
+ âIf you let someone cover your song or remix it or use parts
+ of it, thatâs how music is supposed to work,â Jonathan
+ said. âThat is how music has worked since the beginning of
+ time. Our me-me, mine-mine culture has undermined that.â
There are some people who cover his songs fairly regularly, and he
would never shut that down. But he acknowledges there is a lot
- more he could do to build community. “There is all of this
+ more he could do to build community. âThere is all of this
conventional wisdom about how to build an audience online, and I
- generally think I don’t do any of that,” Jonathan said.
+ generally think I donât do any of that,â Jonathan said.
He does have a fan community he cultivates on Bandcamp, but it
- isn’t his major focus. “I do have a core audience that has
- stuck around for a really long time, some even longer than I’ve
- been doing song-a-day,” he said. “There is also a
+ isnât his major focus. âI do have a core audience that has
+ stuck around for a really long time, some even longer than Iâve
+ been doing song-a-day,â he said. âThere is also a
transitional aspect that drop in and get what they need and then
- move on.” Focusing less on community building than other
- artists makes sense given Jonathan’s primary income source of
+ move on.â Focusing less on community building than other
+ artists makes sense given Jonathanâs primary income source of
writing custom songs for clients.
Jonathan recognizes what comes naturally to him and leverages
those skills. Through the practice of daily songwriting, he
realized he has a gift for distilling complicated subjects into
- simple concepts and putting them to music. In his song “How
- to Choose a Master Password,” Jonathan explained the
+ simple concepts and putting them to music. In his song âHow
+ to Choose a Master Password,â Jonathan explained the
process of creating a secure password in a silly, simple song. He
was hired to write the song by a client who handed him a long
technical blog post from which to draw the information. Like a
@@ -4932,12 +4932,12 @@
the core message and develop the chorus. Then he looks for
connections or parts he can make rhyme. The entire process really
does resemble good journalism, but of course the final product of
- his work is a song rather than news. “There is something
- about being challenged and forced to take information that doesn’t
- seem like it should be sung about or doesn’t seem like it lends
- itself to a song,” he said. “I find that creative
+ his work is a song rather than news. âThere is something
+ about being challenged and forced to take information that doesnât
+ seem like it should be sung about or doesnât seem like it lends
+ itself to a song,â he said. âI find that creative
challenge really satisfying. I enjoy getting lost in that
- process.”
+ process.â
Jonathan admits that in an ideal world, he would exclusively write
the music he wanted to write, rather than what clients hire him to
@@ -4946,29 +4946,29 @@
interesting for himself.
Jonathan uses nearly every tool possible to make money from his
- art, but he does have lines he won’t cross. He won’t write songs
+ art, but he does have lines he wonât cross. He wonât write songs
about things he fundamentally does not believe in, and there are
- times he has turned down jobs on principle. He also won’t stray
- too much from his natural style. “My style is silly, so I
- can’t really accommodate people who want something super
- serious,” Jonathan said. “I do what I do very easily,
- and it’s part of who I am.” Jonathan hasn’t gotten into
+ times he has turned down jobs on principle. He also wonât stray
+ too much from his natural style. âMy style is silly, so I
+ canât really accommodate people who want something super
+ serious,â Jonathan said. âI do what I do very easily,
+ and itâs part of who I am.â Jonathan hasnât gotten into
writing commercials for the same reasons; he is best at using his
own unique style rather than mimicking others.
- Jonathan’s song-a-day commitment exemplifies the power of habit
+ Jonathanâs song-a-day commitment exemplifies the power of habit
and grit. Conventional wisdom about creative productivity,
including advice in books like the best-seller The Creative Habit
by Twyla Tharp, routinely emphasizes the importance of ritual and
action. No amount of planning can replace the value of simple
- practice and just doing. Jonathan Mann’s work is a living
+ practice and just doing. Jonathan Mannâs work is a living
embodiment of these principles.
When he speaks about his work, he talks about how much the
song-a-day process has changed him. Rather than seeing any given
piece of work as precious and getting stuck on trying to make it
- perfect, he has become comfortable with just doing. If today’s
- song is a bust, tomorrow’s song might be better.
+ perfect, he has become comfortable with just doing. If todayâs
+ song is a bust, tomorrowâs song might be better.
Jonathan seems to have this mentality about his career more
generally. He is constantly experimenting with ways to make a
@@ -4976,11 +4976,11 @@
sticks. While he has major accomplishments he is proud of, like
being in the Guinness World Records or having his song used by
Steve Jobs, he says he never truly feels successful.
- “Success feels like it’s over,” he said. “To a
+ âSuccess feels like itâs over,â he said. âTo a
certain extent, a creative person is not ever going to feel
completely satisfied because then so much of what drives you would
- be gone.”
- | |
+ be gone.â
+ Chapter 15. Noun Project|  |
The Noun Project is a for-profit company offering an online
platform to display visual icons from a global network of
designers. Founded in 2010 in the U.S.
@@ -4992,7 +4992,7 @@
2015
Interviewee: Edward Boatman,
cofounder
- | | | | --\begin{flushright}
+ | Â | | Â | --\begin{flushright}
\textit{
Profile written by Paul Stacey
}
@@ -5002,7 +5002,7 @@
across borders, languages, and cultures.
The original idea for the Noun Project came to cofounder Edward
- Boatman while he was a student in architecture design school. He’d
+ Boatman while he was a student in architecture design school. Heâd
always done a lot of sketches and started to draw what used to
fascinate him as a child, like trains, sequoias, and bulldozers.
He began thinking how great it would be if he had a simple image
@@ -5011,7 +5011,7 @@
When Edward went on to work at an architecture firm, he had to
make a lot of presentation boards for clients. But finding
high-quality sources for symbols and icons was difficult. He
- couldn’t find any website that could provide them. Perhaps his
+ couldnât find any website that could provide them. Perhaps his
idea for creating a library of icons could actually help people in
similar situations.
@@ -5025,7 +5025,7 @@
Then Edward got laid off during the recession, which turned out to
be a huge catalyst. He decided to give his idea a go, and in 2010
Edward and Sofya launched the Noun Project with a Kickstarter
- campaign, back when Kickstarter was in its infancy. They thought it’d be a good way to introduce the
+ campaign, back when Kickstarter was in its infancy. They thought itâd be a good way to introduce the
global web community to their idea. Their goal was to raise
$1,500, but in twenty days they got over $14,000. They realized
their idea had the potential to be something much bigger.
@@ -5033,20 +5033,20 @@
They created a platform where symbols and icons could be uploaded,
and Edward began recruiting talented designers to contribute their
designs, a process he describes as a relatively easy sell. Lots of
- designers have old drawings just gathering “digital
- dust” on their hard drives. It’s easy to convince them to
+ designers have old drawings just gathering âdigital
+ dustâ on their hard drives. Itâs easy to convince them to
finally share them with the world.
The Noun Project currently has about seven thousand designers from
around the world. But not all submissions are accepted. The Noun
- Project’s quality-review process means that only the best works
+ Projectâs quality-review process means that only the best works
become part of its collection. They make sure to provide
encouraging, constructive feedback whenever they reject a piece of
work, which maintains and builds the relationship they have with
their global community of designers.
- Creative Commons is an integral part of the Noun Project’s
- business model; this decision was inspired by Chris Anderson’s
+ Creative Commons is an integral part of the Noun Projectâs
+ business model; this decision was inspired by Chris Andersonâs
book Free: The Future of Radical Price, which introduced Edward to
the idea that you could build a business model around free
content.
@@ -5064,45 +5064,45 @@
having to give credit, they can use CC0 to put the work into the
public domain.
- Noun Project’s business model and means of generating revenue have
+ Noun Projectâs business model and means of generating revenue have
evolved significantly over time. Their initial plan was to sell
T-shirts with the icons on it, which in retrospect Edward says was
a horrible idea. They did get a lot of email from people saying
they loved the icons but asking if they could pay a fee instead of
giving attribution. Ad agencies (among others) wanted to keep
marketing and presentation materials clean and free of attribution
- statements. For Edward, “That’s when our lightbulb went
- off.”
+ statements. For Edward, âThatâs when our lightbulb went
+ off.â
- They asked their global network of designers whether they’d be
+ They asked their global network of designers whether theyâd be
open to receiving modest remuneration instead of attribution.
Designers saw it as a win-win. The idea that you could offer your
designs for free and have a global audience and maybe even make
some money was pretty exciting for most designers.
The Noun Project first adopted a model whereby using an icon
- without giving attribution would cost $1.99 per icon. The model’s
+ without giving attribution would cost $1.99 per icon. The modelâs
second iteration added a subscription component, where there would
- be a monthly fee to access a certain number of icons—ten, fifty, a
- hundred, or five hundred. However, users didn’t like these
+ be a monthly fee to access a certain number of iconsâten, fifty, a
+ hundred, or five hundred. However, users didnât like these
hard-count options. They preferred to try out many similar icons
to see which worked best before eventually choosing the one they
wanted to use. So the Noun Project moved to an unlimited model,
whereby users have unlimited access to the whole library for a
flat monthly fee. This service is called NounPro and costs $9.99
- per month. Edward says this model is working well—good for
+ per month. Edward says this model is working wellâgood for
customers, good for creators, and good for the platform.
Customers then began asking for an application-programming
interface (API), which would allow Noun Project icons and symbols
to be directly accessed from within other applications. Edward
knew that the icons and symbols would be valuable in a lot of
- different contexts and that they couldn’t possibly know all of
+ different contexts and that they couldnât possibly know all of
them in advance, so they built an API with a lot of flexibility.
Knowing that most API applications would want to use the icons
without giving attribution, the API was built with the aim of
- charging for its use. You can use what’s called the
- “Playground API” for free to test how it integrates
+ charging for its use. You can use whatâs called the
+ âPlayground APIâ for free to test how it integrates
with your application, but full implementation will require you to
purchase the API Pro version.
@@ -5112,12 +5112,12 @@
The revenue from premium purchases (the subscription and API
options) is split a little differently. At the end of each month,
- the total revenue from subscriptions is divided by Noun Project’s
- total number of downloads, resulting in a rate per download—for
+ the total revenue from subscriptions is divided by Noun Projectâs
+ total number of downloads, resulting in a rate per downloadâfor
example, it could be $0.13 per download for that month. For each
download, the revenue is split 40 percent to the designer and 60
- percent to the Noun Project. (For API usage, it’s per use instead
- of per download.) Noun Project’s share is higher this time as it’s
+ percent to the Noun Project. (For API usage, itâs per use instead
+ of per download.) Noun Projectâs share is higher this time as itâs
providing more service to the user.
The Noun Project tries to be completely transparent about their
@@ -5139,7 +5139,7 @@
collections. Lingo is free for personal use. A pro version for
$9.99 per month lets you add guests. A team version for $49.95 per
month allows up to twenty-five team members to collaborate, and to
- view, use, edit, and add new assets to each other’s collections.
+ view, use, edit, and add new assets to each otherâs collections.
And if you subscribe to NounPro, you can access Noun Project from
within Lingo.
@@ -5149,42 +5149,42 @@
digital designers, advertising and design agencies, educators, and
others who need to communicate ideas visually.
- For Edward, “creating, sharing, and celebrating the world’s
- visual language” is the most important aspect of what they
- do; it’s their stated mission. It differentiates them from others
+ For Edward, âcreating, sharing, and celebrating the worldâs
+ visual languageâ is the most important aspect of what they
+ do; itâs their stated mission. It differentiates them from others
who offer graphics, icons, or clip art.
Noun Project creators agree. When surveyed on why they participate
in the Noun Project, this is how designers rank their reasons: 1)
to support the Noun Project mission, 2) to promote their own
- personal brand, and 3) to generate money. It’s striking to see
+ personal brand, and 3) to generate money. Itâs striking to see
that money comes third, and mission, first. If you want to engage
- a global network of contributors, it’s important to have a mission
+ a global network of contributors, itâs important to have a mission
beyond making money.
- In Edward’s view, Creative Commons is central to their mission of
+ In Edwardâs view, Creative Commons is central to their mission of
sharing and social good. Using Creative Commons makes the Noun
- Project’s mission genuine and has generated a lot of their initial
+ Projectâs mission genuine and has generated a lot of their initial
traction and credibility. CC comes with a built-in community of
users and fans.
- Edward told us, “Don’t underestimate the power of a
+ Edward told us, âDonât underestimate the power of a
passionate community around your product or your business. They
- are going to go to bat for you when you’re getting ripped in the
+ are going to go to bat for you when youâre getting ripped in the
media. If you go down the road of choosing to work with Creative
- Commons, you’re taking the first step to building a great
+ Commons, youâre taking the first step to building a great
community and tapping into a really awesome community that comes
with it. But you need to continue to foster that community through
- other initiatives and continue to nurture it.”
+ other initiatives and continue to nurture it.â
- The Noun Project nurtures their creators’ second
- motivation—promoting a personal brand—by connecting every icon and
- symbol to the creator’s name and profile page; each profile
+ The Noun Project nurtures their creatorsâ second
+ motivationâpromoting a personal brandâby connecting every icon and
+ symbol to the creatorâs name and profile page; each profile
features their full collection. Users can also search the icons by
- the creator’s name.
+ the creatorâs name.
The Noun Project also builds community through
- Iconathons—hackathons for icons. In partnership with a sponsoring organization, the
+ Iconathonsâhackathons for icons. In partnership with a sponsoring organization, the
Noun Project comes up with a theme (e.g., sustainable energy, food
bank, guerrilla gardening, human rights) and a list of icons that
are needed, which designers are invited to create at the event.
@@ -5192,14 +5192,14 @@
CC0 so they can be used by anyone for free.
Providing a free version of their product that satisfies a lot of
- their customers’ needs has actually enabled the Noun Project to
+ their customersâ needs has actually enabled the Noun Project to
build the paid version, using a service-oriented model. The Noun
- Project’s success lies in creating services and content that are a
+ Projectâs success lies in creating services and content that are a
strategic mix of free and paid while staying true to their
- mission—creating, sharing, and celebrating the world’s visual
+ missionâcreating, sharing, and celebrating the worldâs visual
language. Integrating Creative Commons into their model has been
key to that goal.
- Chapter 16. Open Data Institute| |
+ Chapter 16. Open Data Institute|  |
The Open Data Institute is an independent nonprofit that
connects, equips, and inspires people around the world to
innovate with data. Founded in 2012 in the UK.
@@ -5211,7 +5211,7 @@
2015
Interviewee: Jeni Tennison,
technical director
- | | | | --\begin{flushright}
+ | Â | | Â | --\begin{flushright}
\textit{
Profile written by Paul Stacey
}
@@ -5220,9 +5220,9 @@
the London-based Open Data Institute (ODI) offers data-related
training, events, consulting services, and research. For ODI,
Creative Commons licenses are central to making their own business
- model and their customers’ open. CC BY (Attribution), CC BY-SA
+ model and their customersâ open. CC BY (Attribution), CC BY-SA
(Attribution-ShareAlike), and CC0 (placed in the public domain)
- all play a critical role in ODI’s mission to help people around
+ all play a critical role in ODIâs mission to help people around
the world innovate with data.
Data underpins planning and decision making across all aspects of
@@ -5236,12 +5236,12 @@
can help citizens improve their lives by better understanding what
is happening around them.
- The Open Data Institute’s 2012–17 business plan starts out by
+ The Open Data Instituteâs 2012â17 business plan starts out by
describing its vision to establish itself as a world-leading
center and to research and be innovative with the opportunities
- created by the UK government’s open data policy. (The government
+ created by the UK governmentâs open data policy. (The government
was an early pioneer in open policy and open-data initiatives.) It
- goes on to say that the ODI wants to—
+ goes on to say that the ODI wants toâ
ODI is very explicit about how it wants to make open business
- models, and defining what this means. Jeni Tennison, ODI’s
- technical director, puts it this way: “There is a whole
- ecosystem of open—open-source software, open government,
- open-access research—and a whole ecosystem of data. ODI’s work
- cuts across both, with an emphasis on where they overlap—with open
- data.” ODI’s particular focus is to show open data’s
+ models, and defining what this means. Jeni Tennison, ODIâs
+ technical director, puts it this way: âThere is a whole
+ ecosystem of openâopen-source software, open government,
+ open-access researchâand a whole ecosystem of data. ODIâs work
+ cuts across both, with an emphasis on where they overlapâwith open
+ data.â ODIâs particular focus is to show open dataâs
potential for revenue.
- As an independent nonprofit, ODI secured £10 million over five
+ As an independent nonprofit, ODI secured £10 million over five
years from the UK government via Innovate UK, an agency that
promotes innovation in science and technology. For this funding,
ODI has to secure matching funds from other sources, some of which
@@ -5270,14 +5270,14 @@
Network.
Jeni started out as a developer and technical architect for
- data.gov.uk, the UK government’s pioneering open-data initiative.
+ data.gov.uk, the UK governmentâs pioneering open-data initiative.
She helped make data sets from government departments available as
open data. She joined ODI in 2012 when it was just starting up, as
one of six people. It now has a staff of about sixty.
ODI strives to have half its annual budget come from the core UK
government and Omidyar grants, and the other half from
- project-based research and commercial work. In Jeni’s view, having
+ project-based research and commercial work. In Jeniâs view, having
this balance of revenue sources establishes some stability, but
also keeps them motivated to go out and generate these matching
funds in response to market needs.
@@ -5287,12 +5287,12 @@
You can join the ODI as an individual or commercial member.
Individual membership is pay-what-you-can, with options ranging
- from £1 to £100. Members receive a newsletter and related
+ from £1 to £100. Members receive a newsletter and related
communications and a discount on ODI training courses and the
annual summit, and they can display an ODI-supporter badge on
their website. Commercial membership is divided into two tiers:
- small to medium size enterprises and nonprofits at £720 a year,
- and corporations and government organizations at £2,200 a year.
+ small to medium size enterprises and nonprofits at £720 a year,
+ and corporations and government organizations at £2,200 a year.
Commercial members have greater opportunities to connect and
collaborate, explore the benefits of open data, and unlock new
business opportunities. (All members are listed on their
@@ -5305,9 +5305,9 @@
five-day-long public training course, which has subsequently been
reduced to three days; now the most popular course is one day
long. The fee, in addition to the time commitment, can be a
- barrier for participation. Jeni says, “Most of the people
- who would be able to pay don’t know they need it. Most who know
- they need it can’t pay.” Public-sector organizations
+ barrier for participation. Jeni says, âMost of the people
+ who would be able to pay donât know they need it. Most who know
+ they need it canât pay.â Public-sector organizations
sometimes give vouchers to their employees so they can attend as a
form of professional development.
@@ -5319,7 +5319,7 @@
high-level executives, management, and technical staff. The
training tends to generate high interest and commitment.
- Education about open data is also a part of ODI’s annual summit
+ Education about open data is also a part of ODIâs annual summit
event, where curated presentations and speakers showcase the work
of ODI and its members across the entire ecosystem. Tickets to the
summit are available to the public, and hundreds of people and
@@ -5343,7 +5343,7 @@
their own data too. Big data is a hot topic.
Open innovation. Many large-scale enterprises are aware they
- don’t innovate very well. One way they can innovate is to open
+ donât innovate very well. One way they can innovate is to open
up their data. ODI encourages them to do so even if it exposes
problems and challenges. The key is to invite other people to
help while still maintaining organizational autonomy.
@@ -5357,10 +5357,10 @@
During their early years, ODI wanted to focus solely on the United
Kingdom. But in their first year, large delegations of government
visitors from over fifty countries wanted to learn more about the
- UK government’s open-data practices and how ODI saw that
+ UK governmentâs open-data practices and how ODI saw that
translating into economic value. They were contracted as a service
provider to international governments, which prompted a need to
- set up international ODI “nodes.”
+ set up international ODI ânodes.â
Nodes are franchises of the ODI at a regional or city level.
Hosted by existing (for-profit or not-for-profit) organizations,
@@ -5377,7 +5377,7 @@
Europe develop a sustainable business around open data, offering
mentoring, advice, training, and even office space.
- A big part of ODI’s business model revolves around community
+ A big part of ODIâs business model revolves around community
building. Memberships, training, summits, consulting services,
nodes, and start-up programs create an ever-growing network of
open-data users and leaders. (In fact, ODI even operates something
@@ -5388,7 +5388,7 @@
ODI has created an online tool that organizations can use to
assess the legal, practical, technical, and social aspects of
their open data. If it is of high quality, the organization can
- earn ODI’s Open Data Certificate, a globally recognized mark that
+ earn ODIâs Open Data Certificate, a globally recognized mark that
signals that their open data is useful, reliable, accessible,
discoverable, and supported.
@@ -5400,13 +5400,13 @@
Creative Commons 4.0 licenses cover database rights and ODI
recommends CC BY, CC BY-SA, and CC0 for data releases. ODI
encourages publishers of data to use Creative Commons licenses
- rather than creating new “open licenses” of their
+ rather than creating new âopen licensesâ of their
own.
For ODI, open is at the heart of what they do. They also release
any software code they produce under open-source-software
licenses, and publications and reports under CC BY or CC BY-SA
- licenses. ODI’s mission is to connect and equip people around the
+ licenses. ODIâs mission is to connect and equip people around the
world so they can innovate with data. Disseminating stories,
research, guidance, and code under an open license is essential
for achieving that mission. It also demonstrates that it is
@@ -5417,8 +5417,8 @@
them, not for the methodologies they use. Producing open content,
data, and source code helps establish credibility and creates
leads for the paid services that they offer. According to Jeni,
- “The biggest lesson we have learned is that it is completely
- possible to be open, get customers, and make money.”
+ âThe biggest lesson we have learned is that it is completely
+ possible to be open, get customers, and make money.â
To serve as evidence of a successful open business model and
return on investment, ODI has a public dashboard of key
@@ -5428,12 +5428,12 @@
Total amount of cash investments unlocked in direct
investments in ODI, competition funding, direct contracts, and
partnerships, and income that ODI nodes and ODI start-ups have
- generated since joining the ODI program: £44.5 million
+ generated since joining the ODI program: £44.5 million
Total number of active members and nodes across the globe:
1,350
- Total sales since ODI began: £7.44 million
+ Total sales since ODI began: £7.44 million
Total number of unique people reached since ODI began, in
person and online: 2.2 million
@@ -5443,7 +5443,7 @@
Total number of people trained by ODI and its nodes since ODI
began: 5,080
| |
+ http://theodi.org/open-data-incubator-for-europe | Â |
Opendesk is a for-profit company offering an online platform
that connects furniture designers around the world with
customers and local makers who bring the designs to life.
@@ -5456,7 +5456,7 @@
2015
Interviewees: Nick
Ierodiaconou and Joni Steiner, cofounders
- | | | | --\begin{flushright}
+ | Â | | Â | --\begin{flushright}
\textit{
Profile written by Paul Stacey
}
@@ -5469,16 +5469,16 @@
Cofounders Nick Ierodiaconou and Joni Steiner studied and worked
as architects together. They also made goods. Their first client
was Mint Digital, who had an interest in open licensing. Nick and
- Joni were exploring digital fabrication, and Mint’s interest in
+ Joni were exploring digital fabrication, and Mintâs interest in
open licensing got them to thinking how the open-source world may
interact and apply to physical goods. They sought to design
something for their client that was also reproducible. As they put
- it, they decided to “ship the recipe, but not the
- goods.” They created the design using software, put it
+ it, they decided to âship the recipe, but not the
+ goods.â They created the design using software, put it
under an open license, and had it manufactured locally near the
client. This was the start of the idea for Opendesk. The idea for
- Wikihouse—another open project dedicated to accessible housing for
- all—started as discussions around the same table. The two projects
+ Wikihouseâanother open project dedicated to accessible housing for
+ allâstarted as discussions around the same table. The two projects
ultimately went on separate paths, with Wikihouse becoming a
nonprofit foundation and Opendesk a for-profit company.
@@ -5494,7 +5494,7 @@
intellectual property and licensing options. It was a thorny
space, especially for designs. Just what aspect of a design is
copyrightable? What is patentable? How can allowing for digital
- sharing and distribution be balanced against the designer’s desire
+ sharing and distribution be balanced against the designerâs desire
to still hold ownership? In the end, they decided there was no
need to reinvent the wheel and settled on using Creative Commons.
@@ -5504,21 +5504,21 @@
viable model that benefited designers when their designs were
sold. Coming up with a business model was going to be complex.
- They gave a lot of thought to three angles—the potential for
+ They gave a lot of thought to three anglesâthe potential for
social sharing, allowing designers to choose their license, and
the impact these choices would have on the business model.
In support of social sharing, Opendesk actively advocates for (but
- doesn’t demand) open licensing. And Nick and Joni are agnostic
- about which Creative Commons license is used; it’s up to the
+ doesnât demand) open licensing. And Nick and Joni are agnostic
+ about which Creative Commons license is used; itâs up to the
designer. They can be proprietary or choose from the full suite of
Creative Commons licenses, deciding for themselves how open or
closed they want to be.
For the most part, designers love the idea of sharing content.
- They understand that you get positive feedback when you’re
- attributed, what Nick and Joni called “reputational
- glow.” And Opendesk does an awesome job profiling the
+ They understand that you get positive feedback when youâre
+ attributed, what Nick and Joni called âreputational
+ glow.â And Opendesk does an awesome job profiling the
designers.
While designers are largely OK with personal sharing, there is a
@@ -5527,27 +5527,27 @@
most Opendesk designers choose the Attribution-NonCommercial
license (CC BY-NC).
- Anyone can download a design and make it themselves, provided it’s
- for noncommercial use — and there have been many, many downloads.
+ Anyone can download a design and make it themselves, provided itâs
+ for noncommercial useâââand there have been many, many downloads.
Or users can buy the product from Opendesk, or from a registered
- maker in Opendesk’s network, for on-demand personal fabrication.
+ maker in Opendeskâs network, for on-demand personal fabrication.
The network of Opendesk makers currently is made up of those who
do digital fabrication using a computer-controlled CNC (Computer
Numeric Control) machining device that cuts shapes out of wooden
sheets according to the specifications in the design file.
- Makers benefit from being part of Opendesk’s network. Making
+ Makers benefit from being part of Opendeskâs network. Making
furniture for local customers is paid work, and Opendesk generates
- business for them. Joni said, “Finding a whole network and
+ business for them. Joni said, âFinding a whole network and
community of makers was pretty easy because we built a site where
people could write in about their capabilities. Building the
community by learning from the maker community is how we have
- moved forward.” Opendesk now has relationships with
+ moved forward.â Opendesk now has relationships with
hundreds of makers in countries all around the world.
The makers are a critical part of the Opendesk business model.
- Their model builds off the makers’ quotes. Here’s how it’s
- expressed on Opendesk’s website:
+ Their model builds off the makersâ quotes. Hereâs how itâs
+ expressed on Opendeskâs website:
When customers buy an Opendesk product directly from a registered
maker, they pay:
@@ -5566,7 +5566,7 @@
a percentage fee to the channel through which the sale is made
(at the moment this is Opendesk, but in the future we aim to
open this up to third-party sellers who can sell Opendesk
- products through their own channels—this covers sales and
+ products through their own channelsâthis covers sales and
marketing fees for the relevant channel)
a local delivery service charge (the delivery is typically
@@ -5574,14 +5574,14 @@
third-party delivery partner)
charges for any additional services the customer chooses, such
- as on-site assembly (additional services are discretionary—in
+ as on-site assembly (additional services are discretionaryâin
many cases makers will be happy to quote for assembly on-site
and designers may offer bespoke design options)
local sales taxes (variable by customer and maker
location)
- They then go into detail how makers’ quotes are created:
+ They then go into detail how makersâ quotes are created:
When a customer wants to buy an Opendesk . . . they are provided
with a transparent breakdown of fees including the manufacturing
@@ -5607,45 +5607,45 @@
Opendesk shares revenue with their community of designers.
According to Nick and Joni, a typical designer fee is around 2.5
- percent, so Opendesk’s 8 percent is more generous, and providing a
+ percent, so Opendeskâs 8 percent is more generous, and providing a
higher value to the designer.
The Opendesk website features stories of designers and makers.
Denis Fuzii published the design for the Valovi Chair from his
- studio in São Paulo. His designs have been downloaded over five
+ studio in São Paulo. His designs have been downloaded over five
thousand times in ninety-five countries. I.J. CNC Services is Ian
Jinks, a professional maker based in the United Kingdom. Opendesk
now makes up a large proportion of his business.
To manage resources and remain effective, Opendesk has so far
- focused on a very narrow niche—primarily office furniture of a
+ focused on a very narrow nicheâprimarily office furniture of a
certain simple aesthetic, which uses only one type of material and
one manufacturing technique. This allows them to be more strategic
and more disruptive in the market, by getting things to market
quickly with competitive prices. It also reflects their vision of
creating reproducible and functional pieces.
- On their website, Opendesk describes what they do as “open
- making”: “Designers get a global distribution
+ On their website, Opendesk describes what they do as âopen
+ makingâ: âDesigners get a global distribution
channel. Makers get profitable jobs and new customers. You get
designer products without the designer price tag, a more social,
eco-friendly alternative to mass-production and an affordable way
- to buy custom-made products.”
+ to buy custom-made products.â
Nick and Joni say that customers like the fact that the furniture
has a known provenance. People really like that their furniture
was designed by a certain international designer but was made by a
- maker in their local community; it’s a great story to tell. It
+ maker in their local community; itâs a great story to tell. It
certainly sets apart Opendesk furniture from the usual
mass-produced items from a store.
Nick and Joni are taking a community-based approach to define and
- evolve Opendesk and the “open making” business model.
- They’re engaging thought leaders and practitioners to define this
+ evolve Opendesk and the âopen makingâ business model.
+ Theyâre engaging thought leaders and practitioners to define this
new movement. They have a separate Open Making site, which
includes a manifesto, a field guide, and an invitation to get
involved in the Open Making community. People can submit ideas and discuss the principles and
- business practices they’d like to see used.
+ business practices theyâd like to see used.
Nick and Joni talked a lot with us about intellectual property
(IP) and commercialization. Many of their designers fear the idea
@@ -5685,21 +5685,21 @@
that behavioral economics can replace some of the thorny legal
issues. In their business model, Nick and Joni are trying to
suspend the focus on IP and build an open business model that
- works for all stakeholders—designers, channels, manufacturers, and
+ works for all stakeholdersâdesigners, channels, manufacturers, and
customers. For them, the value Opendesk generates hangs off
- “open,” not IP.
+ âopen,â not IP.
The mission of Opendesk is about relocalizing manufacturing, which
changes the way we think about how goods are made.
- Commercialization is integral to their mission, and they’ve begun
+ Commercialization is integral to their mission, and theyâve begun
to focus on success metrics that track how many makers and
designers are engaged through Opendesk in revenue-making work.
- As a global platform for local making, Opendesk’s business model
+ As a global platform for local making, Opendeskâs business model
has been built on honesty, transparency, and inclusivity. As Nick
and Joni describe it, they put ideas out there that get traction
and then have faith in people.
- | |
+ | Â |
OpenStax is a nonprofit that provides free, openly licensed
textbooks for high-enrollment introductory college courses and
Advanced Placement courses. Founded in 2012 in the U.S.
@@ -5712,35 +5712,35 @@
2015
Interviewee: David Harris,
editor-in-chief
- | | | | --\begin{flushright}
+ | Â | | Â | --\begin{flushright}
\textit{
Profile written by Paul Stacey
}
\end{flushright} |
OpenStax is an extension of a program called Connexions, which was
- started in 1999 by Dr. Richard Baraniuk, the Victor E. Cameron
+ started in 1999 by Dr. Richard Baraniuk, the Victor E. Cameron
Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering at Rice
University in Houston, Texas. Frustrated by the limitations of
- traditional textbooks and courses, Dr. Baraniuk wanted to provide
+ traditional textbooks and courses, Dr. Baraniuk wanted to provide
authors and learners a way to share and freely adapt educational
materials such as courses, books, and reports. Today, Connexions
- (now called OpenStax CNX) is one of the world’s best libraries of
+ (now called OpenStax CNX) is one of the worldâs best libraries of
customizable educational materials, all licensed with Creative
- Commons and available to anyone, anywhere, anytime—for free.
+ Commons and available to anyone, anywhere, anytimeâfor free.
In 2008, while in a senior leadership role at WebAssign and
looking at ways to reduce the risk that came with relying on
publishers, David Harris began investigating open educational
resources (OER) and discovered Connexions. A year and a half
later, Connexions received a grant to help grow the use of OER so
- that it could meet the needs of students who couldn’t afford
+ that it could meet the needs of students who couldnât afford
textbooks. David came on board to spearhead this effort.
Connexions became OpenStax CNX; the program to create open
textbooks became OpenStax College, now simply called OpenStax.
David brought with him a deep understanding of the best practices
of publishing along with where publishers have inefficiencies. In
- David’s view, peer review and high standards for quality are
+ Davidâs view, peer review and high standards for quality are
critically important if you want to scale easily. Books have to
have logical scope and sequence, they have to exist as a whole and
not in pieces, and they have to be easy to find. The working
@@ -5767,7 +5767,7 @@
textbooks and to advocate for their use.
Teachers are invited to try out a single chapter from one of the
- textbooks with students. If that goes well, they’re encouraged to
+ textbooks with students. If that goes well, theyâre encouraged to
adopt the entire book. They can simply paste a URL into their
course syllabus, for free and unlimited access. And with the CC BY
license, teachers are free to delete chapters, make changes, and
@@ -5780,12 +5780,12 @@
on.
Institutions can stand out by offering students a lower-cost
- education through the use of OpenStax textbooks; there’s even a
+ education through the use of OpenStax textbooks; thereâs even a
textbook-savings calculator they can use to see how much students
would save. OpenStax keeps a running list of institutions that
have adopted their textbooks.
- Unlike traditional publishers’ monolithic approach of controlling
+ Unlike traditional publishersâ monolithic approach of controlling
intellectual property, distribution, and so many other aspects,
OpenStax has adopted a model that embraces open licensing and
relies on an extensive network of partners.
@@ -5818,18 +5818,18 @@
revisions of their titles, such as Introduction to Sociology 2e,
using these funds.
- In David’s view, this approach lets the market operate at peak
- efficiency. OpenStax’s partners don’t have to worry about
+ In Davidâs view, this approach lets the market operate at peak
+ efficiency. OpenStaxâs partners donât have to worry about
developing textbook content, freeing them up from those
development costs and letting them focus on what they do best.
With OpenStax textbooks available at no cost, they can provide
- their services at a lower cost—not free, but still saving students
+ their services at a lower costânot free, but still saving students
money. OpenStax benefits not only by receiving mission-support
- fees but through free publicity and marketing. OpenStax doesn’t
+ fees but through free publicity and marketing. OpenStax doesnât
have a sales force; partners are out there showcasing their
materials.
- OpenStax’s cost of sales to acquire a single student is very, very
+ OpenStaxâs cost of sales to acquire a single student is very, very
low and is a fraction of what traditional players in the market
face. This year, Tyton Partners is actually evaluating the costs
of sales for an OER effort like OpenStax in comparison with
@@ -5857,11 +5857,11 @@
policy. This is working well, since the sell-through of their
print titles is virtually a hundred percent.
- David thinks of the OpenStax model as “OER 2.0.” So
+ David thinks of the OpenStax model as âOER 2.0.â So
what is OER 1.0? Historically in the OER field, many OER
initiatives have been locally funded by institutions or government
- ministries. In David’s view, this results in content that has high
- local value but is infrequently adopted nationally. It’s therefore
+ ministries. In Davidâs view, this results in content that has high
+ local value but is infrequently adopted nationally. Itâs therefore
difficult to show payback over a time scale that is reasonable.
OER 2.0 is about OER intended to be used and adopted on a national
@@ -5880,10 +5880,10 @@
scope and sequence of existing textbooks. They ask questions like
what does the customer need? Where are students having challenges?
Then they identify potential authors and put them through a
- rigorous evaluation—only one in ten authors make it through.
+ rigorous evaluationâonly one in ten authors make it through.
OpenStax selects a team of authors who come together to develop a
template for a chapter and collectively write the first draft (or
- revise it, in the acquisitions model). (OpenStax doesn’t do books
+ revise it, in the acquisitions model). (OpenStax doesnât do books
with just a single author as David says it risks the project going
longer than scheduled.) The draft is peer-reviewed with no less
than three reviewers per chapter. A second draft is generated,
@@ -5895,15 +5895,15 @@
All the people involved in this process are paid. OpenStax does
not rely on volunteers. Writers, reviewers, illustrators, and
- editors are all paid an up-front fee—OpenStax does not use a
+ editors are all paid an up-front feeâOpenStax does not use a
royalty model. A best-selling author might make more money under
the traditional publishing model, but that is only maybe 5 percent
- of all authors. From David’s perspective, 95 percent of all
+ of all authors. From Davidâs perspective, 95 percent of all
authors do better under the OER 2.0 model, as there is no risk to
them and they earn all the money up front.
David thinks of the Attribution license (CC BY) as the
- “innovation license.” It’s core to the mission of
+ âinnovation license.â Itâs core to the mission of
OpenStax, letting people use their textbooks in innovative ways
without having to ask for permission. It frees up the whole market
and has been central to OpenStax being able to bring on partners.
@@ -5912,9 +5912,9 @@
academic freedom.
Using CC BY is also a good example of using strategies that
- traditional publishers can’t. Traditional publishers rely on
+ traditional publishers canât. Traditional publishers rely on
copyright to prevent others from making copies and heavily invest
- in digital rights management to ensure their books aren’t shared.
+ in digital rights management to ensure their books arenât shared.
By using CC BY, OpenStax avoids having to deal with digital rights
management and its costs. OpenStax books can be copied and shared
over and over again. CC BY changes the rules of engagement and
@@ -5947,7 +5947,7 @@
OpenStax has primarily focused on introductory-level college
courses where there is high enrollment, but they are starting to
- think about verticals—a broad offering for a specific group or
+ think about verticalsâa broad offering for a specific group or
need. David thinks it would be terrific if OpenStax could provide
access to free textbooks through the entire curriculum of a
nursing degree, for example.
@@ -5962,7 +5962,7 @@
business model based on Creative Commons, OpenStax is making it
possible for every student who wants access to education to get
it.
- Chapter 19. Amanda Palmer| |
+ Chapter 19. Amanda Palmer|  |
Amanda Palmer is a musician, artist, and writer. Based in the
U.S.
@@ -5973,29 +5973,29 @@
(performances), selling merchandise
Interview date: December 15,
2015
- | | | | --\begin{flushright}
+ | Â | | Â | --\begin{flushright}
\textit{
Profile written by Sarah Hinchliff Pearson
}
\end{flushright} |
Since the beginning of her career, Amanda Palmer has been on what
- she calls a “journey with no roadmap,” continually
+ she calls a âjourney with no roadmap,â continually
experimenting to find new ways to sustain her creative
work.
In her best-selling book, The Art of Asking, Amanda articulates
- exactly what she has been and continues to strive for—“the
+ exactly what she has been and continues to strive forââthe
ideal sweet spot . . . in which the artist can share freely and
directly feel the reverberations of their artistic gifts to the
- community, and make a living doing that.”
+ community, and make a living doing that.â
While she seems to have successfully found that sweet spot for
herself, Amanda is the first to acknowledge there is no silver
bullet. She thinks the digital age is both an exciting and
- frustrating time for creators. “On the one hand, we have
- this beautiful shareability,” Amanda said. “On the
- other, you’ve got a bunch of confused artists wondering how to
- make money to buy food so we can make more art.”
+ frustrating time for creators. âOn the one hand, we have
+ this beautiful shareability,â Amanda said. âOn the
+ other, youâve got a bunch of confused artists wondering how to
+ make money to buy food so we can make more art.â
Amanda began her artistic career as a street performer. She would
dress up in an antique wedding gown, paint her face white, stand
@@ -6005,25 +6005,25 @@
few stopped to watch and drop some money into her hat to show
their appreciation. Rather than dwelling on the majority of people
who ignored her, she felt thankful for those who stopped.
- “All I needed was . . . some people,” she wrote in
- her book. “Enough people. Enough to make it worth coming
+ âAll I needed was . . . some people,â she wrote in
+ her book. âEnough people. Enough to make it worth coming
back the next day, enough people to help me make rent and put food
- on the table. Enough so I could keep making art.”
+ on the table. Enough so I could keep making art.â
Amanda has come a long way from her street-performing days, but
- her career remains dominated by that same sentiment—finding ways
- to reach “her crowd” and feeling gratitude when she
+ her career remains dominated by that same sentimentâfinding ways
+ to reach âher crowdâ and feeling gratitude when she
does. With her band the Dresden Dolls, Amanda tried the
- traditional path of signing with a record label. It didn’t take
+ traditional path of signing with a record label. It didnât take
for a variety of reasons, but one of them was that the label had
- absolutely no interest in Amanda’s view of success. They wanted
+ absolutely no interest in Amandaâs view of success. They wanted
hits, but making music for the masses was never what Amanda and
the Dresden Dolls set out to do.
After leaving the record label in 2008, she began experimenting
with different ways to make a living. She released music directly
to the public without involving a middle man, releasing digital
- files on a “pay what you want” basis and selling CDs
+ files on a âpay what you wantâ basis and selling CDs
and vinyl. She also made money from live performances and
merchandise sales. Eventually, in 2012 she decided to try her hand
at the sort of crowdfunding we know so well today. Her Kickstarter
@@ -6036,9 +6036,9 @@
from her fan base on Patreon, a crowdfunding site that allows
artists to get recurring donations from fans. More than eight
thousand people have signed up to support her so she can create
- music, art, and any other creative “thing” that she
+ music, art, and any other creative âthingâ that she
is inspired to make. The recurring pledges are made on a
- “per thing” basis. All of the content she makes is
+ âper thingâ basis. All of the content she makes is
made freely available under an
Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike license (CC BY-NC-SA).
@@ -6049,30 +6049,30 @@
Commons. Amanda says the Dresden Dolls used to get ten emails per
week from fans asking if they could use their music for different
projects. They said yes to all of the requests, as long as it
- wasn’t for a completely for-profit venture. At the time, they used
- a short-form agreement written by Amanda herself. “I made
- everyone sign that contract so at least I wouldn’t be leaving the
+ wasnât for a completely for-profit venture. At the time, they used
+ a short-form agreement written by Amanda herself. âI made
+ everyone sign that contract so at least I wouldnât be leaving the
band vulnerable to someone later going on and putting our music in
- a Camel cigarette ad,” Amanda said. Once she discovered
+ a Camel cigarette ad,â Amanda said. Once she discovered
Creative Commons, adopting the licenses was an easy decision
because it gave them a more formal, standardized way of doing what
they had been doing all along. The NonCommercial licenses were a
natural fit.
Amanda embraces the way her fans share and build upon her music.
- In The Art of Asking, she wrote that some of her fans’ unofficial
+ In The Art of Asking, she wrote that some of her fansâ unofficial
videos using her music surpass the official videos in number of
views on YouTube. Rather than seeing this sort of thing as
- competition, Amanda celebrates it. “We got into this because
- we wanted to share the joy of music,” she said.
+ competition, Amanda celebrates it. âWe got into this because
+ we wanted to share the joy of music,â she said.
This is symbolic of how nearly everything she does in her career
is motivated by a desire to connect with her fans. At the start of
her career, she and the band would throw concerts at house
parties. As the gatherings grew, the line between fans and friends
- was completely blurred. “Not only did most our early fans
+ was completely blurred. âNot only did most our early fans
know where I lived and where we practiced, but most of them had
- also been in my kitchen,” Amanda wrote in The Art of
+ also been in my kitchen,â Amanda wrote in The Art of
Asking.
Even though her fan base is now huge and global, she continues to
@@ -6083,61 +6083,61 @@
shows. It helps that Amanda has the kind of dynamic, engaging
personality that instantly draws people to her, but a big
component of her ability to connect with people is her willingness
- to listen. “Listening fast and caring immediately is a skill
- unto itself,” Amanda wrote.
+ to listen. âListening fast and caring immediately is a skill
+ unto itself,â Amanda wrote.
Another part of the connection fans feel with Amanda is how much
they know about her life. Rather than trying to craft a public
persona or image, she essentially lives her life as an open book.
She has written openly about incredibly personal events in her
- life, and she isn’t afraid to be vulnerable. Having that kind of
- trust in her fans—the trust it takes to be truly honest—begets
+ life, and she isnât afraid to be vulnerable. Having that kind of
+ trust in her fansâthe trust it takes to be truly honestâbegets
trust from her fans in return. When she meets fans for the first
time after a show, they can legitimately feel like they know her.
- “With social media, we’re so concerned with the picture
+ âWith social media, weâre so concerned with the picture
looking palatable and consumable that we forget that being human
and showing the flaws and exposing the vulnerability actually
- create a deeper connection than just looking fantastic,”
- Amanda said. “Everything in our culture is telling us
+ create a deeper connection than just looking fantastic,â
+ Amanda said. âEverything in our culture is telling us
otherwise. But my experience has shown me that the risk of making
- yourself vulnerable is almost always worth it.”
+ yourself vulnerable is almost always worth it.â
Not only does she disclose intimate details of her life to them,
she sleeps on their couches, listens to their stories, cries with
them. In short, she treats her fans like friends in nearly every
possible way, even when they are complete strangers. This
- mentality—that fans are friends—is completely intertwined with
- Amanda’s success as an artist. It is also intertwined with her use
+ mentalityâthat fans are friendsâis completely intertwined with
+ Amandaâs success as an artist. It is also intertwined with her use
of Creative Commons licenses. Because that is what you do with
- your friends—you share.
+ your friendsâyou share.
After years of investing time and energy into building trust with
her fans, she has a strong enough relationship with them to ask
- for support—through pay-what-you-want donations, Kickstarter,
+ for supportâthrough pay-what-you-want donations, Kickstarter,
Patreon, or even asking them to lend a hand at a concert. As
Amanda explains it, crowdfunding (which is really what all of
these different things are) is about asking for support from
people who know and trust you. People who feel personally invested
in your success.
- “When you openly, radically trust people, they not only take
- care of you, they become your allies, your family,” she
+ âWhen you openly, radically trust people, they not only take
+ care of you, they become your allies, your family,â she
wrote. There really is a feeling of solidarity within her core fan
base. From the beginning, Amanda and her band encouraged people to
dress up for their shows. They consciously cultivated a feeling of
- belonging to their “weird little family.”
+ belonging to their âweird little family.â
This sort of intimacy with fans is not possible or even desirable
- for every creator. “I don’t take for granted that I happen
+ for every creator. âI donât take for granted that I happen
to be the type of person who loves cavorting with
- strangers,” Amanda said. “I recognize that it’s not
- necessarily everyone’s idea of a good time. Everyone does it
- differently. Replicating what I have done won’t work for others if
- it isn’t joyful to them. It’s about finding a way to channel
- energy in a way that is joyful to you.”
+ strangers,â Amanda said. âI recognize that itâs not
+ necessarily everyoneâs idea of a good time. Everyone does it
+ differently. Replicating what I have done wonât work for others if
+ it isnât joyful to them. Itâs about finding a way to channel
+ energy in a way that is joyful to you.â
Yet while Amanda joyfully interacts with her fans and involves
them in her work as much as possible, she does keep one job
- primarily to herself—writing the music. She loves the creativity
+ primarily to herselfâwriting the music. She loves the creativity
with which her fans use and adapt her work, but she intentionally
does not involve them at the first stage of creating her artistic
work. And, of course, the songs and music are what initially draw
@@ -6148,23 +6148,23 @@
art and then the bond strengthens with human connection.
For Amanda, the entire point of being an artist is to establish
- and maintain this connection. “It sounds so corny,”
- she said, “but my experience in forty years on this planet
- has pointed me to an obvious truth—that connection with human
+ and maintain this connection. âIt sounds so corny,â
+ she said, âbut my experience in forty years on this planet
+ has pointed me to an obvious truthâthat connection with human
beings feels so much better and more fulfilling than approaching
art through a capitalist lens. There is no more satisfying end
goal than having someone tell you that what you do is genuinely of
- value to them.”
+ value to them.â
As she explains it, when a fan gives her a ten-dollar bill,
usually what they are saying is that the money symbolizes some
deeper value the music provided them. For Amanda, art is not just
- a product; it’s a relationship. Viewed from this lens, what Amanda
+ a product; itâs a relationship. Viewed from this lens, what Amanda
does today is not that different from what she did as a young
street performer. She shares her music and other artistic gifts.
She shares herself. And then rather than forcing people to help
her, she lets them.
- Chapter 20. PLOS (Public Library of Science)| |
+ Chapter 20. PLOS (Public Library of Science)|  |
PLOS (Public Library of Science) is a nonprofit that publishes a
library of academic journals and other scientific literature.
Founded in 2000 in the U.S.
@@ -6176,15 +6176,15 @@
Interview date: March 7, 2016
Interviewee: Louise Page,
publisher
- | | | | --\begin{flushright}
+ | Â | | Â | --\begin{flushright}
\textit{
Profile written by Paul Stacey
}
\end{flushright} |
The Public Library of Science (PLOS) began in 2000 when three
- leading scientists—Harold E. Varmus, Patrick O. Brown, and Michael
- Eisen—started an online petition. They were calling for scientists
- to stop submitting papers to journals that didn’t make the full
+ leading scientistsâHarold E. Varmus, Patrick O. Brown, and Michael
+ Eisenâstarted an online petition. They were calling for scientists
+ to stop submitting papers to journals that didnât make the full
text of their papers freely available immediately or within six
months. Although tens of thousands signed the petition, most did
not follow through. In August 2001, Patrick and Michael announced
@@ -6207,7 +6207,7 @@
For Louise Page, the current publisher of PLOS, this traditional
model results in inequity. Access is restricted to those who can
pay. Most research is funded through government-appointed
- agencies, that is, with public funds. It’s unjust that the public
+ agencies, that is, with public funds. Itâs unjust that the public
who funded the research would be required to pay again to access
the results. Not everyone can afford the ever-escalating
subscription fees publishers charge, especially when library
@@ -6231,7 +6231,7 @@
access the journal, PLOS decided to turn the model on its head and
charge a publication fee, known as an article-processing charge.
This up-front fee, generally paid by the funder of the research or
- the author’s institution, covers the expenses such as editorial
+ the authorâs institution, covers the expenses such as editorial
oversight, peer-review management, journal production, online
hosting, and support for discovery. Fees are per article and are
billed upon acceptance for publishing. There are no additional
@@ -6239,7 +6239,7 @@
Calculating the article-processing charge involves taking all the
costs associated with publishing the journal and determining a
- cost per article that collectively recovers costs. For PLOS’s
+ cost per article that collectively recovers costs. For PLOSâs
journals in biology, medicine, genetics, computational biology,
neglected tropical diseases, and pathogens, the article-processing
charge ranges from $2,250 to $2,900. Article-publication charges
@@ -6247,7 +6247,7 @@
PLOS believes that lack of funds should not be a barrier to
publication. Since its inception, PLOS has provided fee support
- for individuals and institutions to help authors who can’t afford
+ for individuals and institutions to help authors who canât afford
the article-processing charges.
Louise identifies marketing as one area of big difference between
@@ -6257,7 +6257,7 @@
Restricting access to subscribers means that tools for managing
access control are necessary. They spend millions of dollars on
access-control systems, staff to manage them, and sales staff.
- With PLOS’s open-access publishing, there’s no need for these
+ With PLOSâs open-access publishing, thereâs no need for these
massive expenses; the articles are free, open, and accessible to
all upon publication. Additionally, traditional publishers tend to
spend more on marketing to libraries, who ultimately pay the
@@ -6338,12 +6338,12 @@
volume of articles, the more time the approval process inevitably
takes.
- Peer review is another part of the process that could change. It’s
+ Peer review is another part of the process that could change. Itâs
possible to redefine what peer review actually is, when to review,
and what constitutes the final article for publication. Louise
talked about the potential to shift to an open-review process,
placing the emphasis on transparency rather than double-blind
- reviews. Louise thinks we’re moving into a direction where it’s
+ reviews. Louise thinks weâre moving into a direction where itâs
actually beneficial for an author to know who is reviewing their
paper and for the reviewer to know their review will be public. An
open-review process can also ensure everyone gets credit; right
@@ -6351,7 +6351,7 @@
Louise says research with negative outcomes is almost as important
as positive results. If journals published more research with
- negative outcomes, we’d learn from what didn’t work. It could also
+ negative outcomes, weâd learn from what didnât work. It could also
reduce how much the research wheel gets reinvented around the
world.
@@ -6369,7 +6369,7 @@
based on their research. Other researches may see findings the
preprint author has not yet thought of. However, preprints help
researchers get their discoveries out early and establish
- precedence. A big challenge is that researchers don’t have a lot
+ precedence. A big challenge is that researchers donât have a lot
of time to comment on preprints.
What constitutes a journal article could also change. The idea of
@@ -6414,7 +6414,7 @@
Ultimately, for PLOS, its authors, and its readers, success is
about making research discoverable, available, and reproducible
for the advancement of science.
- | |
+ Chapter 21. Rijksmuseum|  |
The Rijksmuseum is a Dutch national museum dedicated to art and
history. Founded in 1800 in the Netherlands
@@ -6426,7 +6426,7 @@
2015
Interviewee: Lizzy Jongma,
the data manager of the collections information department
- | | | | --\begin{flushright}
+ | Â | | Â | --\begin{flushright}
\textit{
Profile written by Paul Stacey
}
@@ -6449,13 +6449,13 @@
By the time Lizzy Jongma joined the Rijksmuseum in 2011 as a data
manager, staff were fed up with the situation the museum was in.
They also realized that even with the new and larger space, it
- still wouldn’t be able to show very much of the whole
- collection—eight thousand of over one million works representing
+ still wouldnât be able to show very much of the whole
+ collectionâeight thousand of over one million works representing
just 1 percent. Staff began exploring ways to express themselves,
to have something to show for all of the work they had been doing.
The Rijksmuseum is primarily funded by Dutch taxpayers, so was
there a way for the museum provide benefit to the public while it
- was closed? They began thinking about sharing Rijksmuseum’s
+ was closed? They began thinking about sharing Rijksmuseumâs
collection using information technology. And they put up a
card-catalog like database of the entire collection online.
@@ -6467,7 +6467,7 @@
important pieces in the Rijksmuseum collection? That eventually
led to why not put the whole collection online?
- Then, Lizzy says, Europeana came along. Europeana is Europe’s
+ Then, Lizzy says, Europeana came along. Europeana is Europeâs
digital library, museum, and archive for cultural
heritage. As an online portal to museum collections all across
Europe, Europeana had become an important online platform. In
@@ -6480,14 +6480,14 @@
scary, but at the same time it stimulated even more discussion on
whether the Rijksmuseum should follow suit.
- They realized that they don’t “own” the collection
- and couldn’t realistically monitor and enforce compliance with the
+ They realized that they donât âownâ the collection
+ and couldnât realistically monitor and enforce compliance with the
restrictive licensing terms they currently had in place. For
- example, many copies and versions of Vermeer’s Milkmaid (part of
+ example, many copies and versions of Vermeerâs Milkmaid (part of
their collection) were already online, many of them of very poor
quality. They could spend time and money policing its use, but it
- would probably be futile and wouldn’t make people stop using their
- images online. They ended up thinking it’s an utter waste of time
+ would probably be futile and wouldnât make people stop using their
+ images online. They ended up thinking itâs an utter waste of time
to hunt down people who use the Rijksmuseum collection. And
anyway, restricting access meant the people they were frustrating
the most were schoolkids.
@@ -6517,15 +6517,15 @@
Releasing these high-quality images for free reduced the number of
poor-quality images that were proliferating. The high-quality
- image of Vermeer’s Milkmaid, for example, is downloaded two to
+ image of Vermeerâs Milkmaid, for example, is downloaded two to
three thousand times a month. On the Internet, images from a
source like the Rijksmuseum are more trusted, and releasing them
with a Creative Commons CC0 means they can easily be found in
other platforms. For example, Rijksmuseum images are now used in
thousands of Wikipedia articles, receiving ten to eleven million
- views per month. This extends Rijksmuseum’s reach far beyond the
+ views per month. This extends Rijksmuseumâs reach far beyond the
scope of its website. Sharing these images online creates what
- Lizzy calls the “Mona Lisa effect,” where a work of
+ Lizzy calls the âMona Lisa effect,â where a work of
art becomes so famous that people want to see it in real life by
visiting the actual museum.
@@ -6537,7 +6537,7 @@
generate revenue generation, including for the Rijksmuseum.
As museums create a digital presence for themselves and put up
- digital representations of their collection online, there’s
+ digital representations of their collection online, thereâs
frequently a worry that it will lead to a drop in actual physical
visits. For the Rijksmuseum, this has not turned out to be the
case. Lizzy told us the Rijksmuseum used to get about one million
@@ -6545,13 +6545,13 @@
a year. Making the collection available online has generated
publicity and acts as a form of marketing. The Creative Commons
mark encourages reuse as well. When the image is found on protest
- leaflets, milk cartons, and children’s toys, people also see what
- museum the image comes from and this increases the museum’s
+ leaflets, milk cartons, and childrenâs toys, people also see what
+ museum the image comes from and this increases the museumâs
visibility.
- In 2011 the Rijksmuseum received €1 million from the Dutch lottery
+ In 2011 the Rijksmuseum received â¬1 million from the Dutch lottery
to create a new web presence that would be different from any
- other museum’s. In addition to redesigning their main website to
+ other museumâs. In addition to redesigning their main website to
be mobile friendly and responsive to devices like the iPad, the
Rijksmuseum also created the Rijksstudio, where users and artists
could use and do various things with the Rijksmuseum
@@ -6561,7 +6561,7 @@
high-quality digital representations of masterworks from the
collection. Users can zoom in to any work and even clip small
parts of images they like. Rijksstudio is a bit like Pinterest.
- You can “like” works and compile your personal
+ You can âlikeâ works and compile your personal
favorites, and you can share them with friends or download them
free of charge. All the images in the Rijksstudio are copyright
and royalty free, and users are encouraged to use them as they
@@ -6575,7 +6575,7 @@
Some contemporary artists who have works in the Rijksmuseum
collection contacted them to ask why their works were not included
- in the Rijksstudio. The answer was that contemporary artists’
+ in the Rijksstudio. The answer was that contemporary artistsâ
works are still bound by copyright. The Rijksmuseum does encourage
contemporary artists to use a Creative Commons license for their
works, usually a CC BY-SA license (Attribution-ShareAlike), or a
@@ -6588,7 +6588,7 @@
As Lizzy says, even Rembrandt was commercial, making his
livelihood from selling his paintings. The Rijksmuseum encourages
entrepreneurial commercial use of the images in Rijksstudio.
- They’ve even partnered with the DIY marketplace Etsy to inspire
+ Theyâve even partnered with the DIY marketplace Etsy to inspire
people to sell their creations. One great example you can find on
Etsy is a kimono designed by Angie Johnson, who used an image of
an elaborate cabinet along with an oil painting by Jan Asselijn
@@ -6599,7 +6599,7 @@
competition invites the public to use Rijksstudio images to make
new creative designs. A jury of renowned designers and curators
selects ten finalists and three winners. The final award comes
- with a prize of €10,000. The second edition in 2015 attracted a
+ with a prize of â¬10,000. The second edition in 2015 attracted a
staggering 892 top-class entries. Some award winners end up with
their work sold through the Rijksmuseum store, such as the 2014
entry featuring makeup based on a specific color scheme of a work
@@ -6617,7 +6617,7 @@
for the Rijksmuseum. They were one of the first museums to open up
their collection (that is, give free access) with high-quality
images. This strategy, along with the many improvements to the
- Rijksmuseum’s website, dramatically increased visits to their
+ Rijksmuseumâs website, dramatically increased visits to their
website from thirty-five thousand visits per month to three
hundred thousand.
@@ -6635,26 +6635,26 @@
For the Rijksmuseum, adopting an open business model was scary.
They came up with many worst-case scenarios, imagining all kinds
- of awful things people might do with the museum’s works. But Lizzy
- says those fears did not come true because “ninety-nine
- percent of people have respect for great art.” Many museums
+ of awful things people might do with the museumâs works. But Lizzy
+ says those fears did not come true because âninety-nine
+ percent of people have respect for great art.â Many museums
think they can make a lot of money by selling things related to
- their collection. But in Lizzy’s experience, museums are usually
+ their collection. But in Lizzyâs experience, museums are usually
bad at selling things, and sometimes efforts to generate a small
- amount of money block something much bigger—the real value that
+ amount of money block something much biggerâthe real value that
the collection has. For Lizzy, clinging to small amounts of
revenue is being penny-wise but pound-foolish. For the
Rijksmuseum, a key lesson has been to never lose sight of its
vision for the collection. Allowing access to and use of their
- collection has generated great promotional value—far more than the
+ collection has generated great promotional valueâfar more than the
previous practice of charging fees for access and use. Lizzy sums
- up their experience: “Give away; get something in return.
- Generosity makes people happy to join you and help out.”
+ up their experience: âGive away; get something in return.
+ Generosity makes people happy to join you and help out.â
| |
+ http://www.rijksmuseum.nl/en/rijksstudio-award-2015 | Â |
Shareable is an online magazine about sharing. Founded in 2009
in the U.S.
@@ -6665,7 +6665,7 @@
2016
Interviewee: Neal Gorenflo,
cofounder and executive editor
- | | | | --\begin{flushright}
+ | Â | | Â | --\begin{flushright}
\textit{
Profile written by Sarah Hinchliff Pearson
}
@@ -6674,99 +6674,99 @@
publication had helped start a sharing movement four years prior,
but over time, they watched one part of the movement stray from
its ideals. As giants like Uber and Airbnb gained ground,
- attention began to center on the “sharing economy” we
- know now—profit-driven, transactional, and loaded with
+ attention began to center on the âsharing economyâ we
+ know nowâprofit-driven, transactional, and loaded with
venture-capital money. Leaders of corporate start-ups in this
domain invited Shareable to advocate for them. The magazine faced
a choice: ride the wave or stand on principle.
As an organization, Shareable decided to draw a line in the sand.
In 2013, the cofounder and executive editor Neal Gorenflo wrote an
- opinion piece in the PandoDaily that charted Shareable’s new
+ opinion piece in the PandoDaily that charted Shareableâs new
critical stance on the Silicon Valley version of the sharing
economy, while contrasting it with aspects of the real sharing
economy like open-source software, participatory budgeting (where
citizens decide how a public budget is spent), cooperatives, and
- more. He wrote, “It’s not so much that collaborative
- consumption is dead, it’s more that it risks dying as it gets
- absorbed by the ‘Borg.’”
+ more. He wrote, âItâs not so much that collaborative
+ consumption is dead, itâs more that it risks dying as it gets
+ absorbed by the âBorg.ââ
Neal said their public critique of the corporate sharing economy
defined what Shareable was and is. He does not think the magazine
- would still be around had they chosen differently. “We would
+ would still be around had they chosen differently. âWe would
have gotten another type of audience, but it would have spelled
- the end of us,” he said. “We are a small,
+ the end of us,â he said. âWe are a small,
mission-driven organization. We would never have been able to
weather the criticism that Airbnb and Uber are getting
- now.”
+ now.â
Interestingly, impassioned supporters are only a small sliver of
- Shareable’s total audience. Most are casual readers who come
+ Shareableâs total audience. Most are casual readers who come
across a Shareable story because it happens to align with a
project or interest they have. But choosing principles over the
possibility of riding the coattails of the major corporate players
- in the sharing space saved Shareable’s credibility. Although they
+ in the sharing space saved Shareableâs credibility. Although they
became detached from the corporate sharing economy, the online
- magazine became the voice of the “real sharing
- economy” and continued to grow their audience.
+ magazine became the voice of the âreal sharing
+ economyâ and continued to grow their audience.
Shareable is a magazine, but the content they publish is a means
to furthering their role as a leader and catalyst of a movement.
- Shareable became a leader in the movement in 2009. “At that
+ Shareable became a leader in the movement in 2009. âAt that
time, there was a sharing movement bubbling beneath the surface,
- but no one was connecting the dots,” Neal said. “We
- decided to step into that space and take on that role.” The
+ but no one was connecting the dots,â Neal said. âWe
+ decided to step into that space and take on that role.â The
small team behind the nonprofit publication truly believed sharing
could be central to solving some of the major problems human
- beings face—resource inequality, social isolation, and global
+ beings faceâresource inequality, social isolation, and global
warming.
They have worked hard to find ways to tell stories that show
- different metrics for success. “We wanted to change the
- notion of what constitutes the good life,” Neal said. While
+ different metrics for success. âWe wanted to change the
+ notion of what constitutes the good life,â Neal said. While
they started out with a very broad focus on sharing generally,
today they emphasize stories about the physical commons like
- “sharing cities” (i.e., urban areas managed in a
+ âsharing citiesâ (i.e., urban areas managed in a
sustainable, cooperative way), as well as digital platforms that
are run democratically. They particularly focus on how-to content
that help their readers make changes in their own lives and
communities.
- More than half of Shareable’s stories are written by paid
+ More than half of Shareableâs stories are written by paid
journalists that are contracted by the magazine.
- “Particularly in content areas that are a priority for us,
- we really want to go deep and control the quality,” Neal
+ âParticularly in content areas that are a priority for us,
+ we really want to go deep and control the quality,â Neal
said. The rest of the content is either contributed by guest
writers, often for free, or written by other publications from
their network of content publishers. Shareable is a member of the
Post Growth Alliance, which facilitates the sharing of content and
audiences among a large and growing group of mostly nonprofits.
Each organization gets a chance to present stories to the group,
- and the organizations can use and promote each other’s stories.
+ and the organizations can use and promote each otherâs stories.
Much of the content created by the network is licensed with
Creative Commons.
- All of Shareable’s original content is published under the
+ All of Shareableâs original content is published under the
Attribution license (CC BY), meaning it can be used for any
purpose as long as credit is given to Shareable. Creative Commons
- licensing is aligned with Shareable’s vision, mission, and
- identity. That alone explains the organization’s embrace of the
+ licensing is aligned with Shareableâs vision, mission, and
+ identity. That alone explains the organizationâs embrace of the
licenses for their content, but Neal also believes CC licensing
- helps them increase their reach. “By using CC
- licensing,” he said, “we realized we could reach far
+ helps them increase their reach. âBy using CC
+ licensing,â he said, âwe realized we could reach far
more people through a formal and informal network of republishers
- or affiliates. That has definitely been the case. It’s hard for us
+ or affiliates. That has definitely been the case. Itâs hard for us
to measure the reach of other media properties, but most of the
outlets who republish our work have much bigger audiences than we
- do.”
+ do.â
In addition to their regular news and commentary online, Shareable
has also experimented with book publishing. In 2012, they worked
with a traditional publisher to release Share or Die: Voices of
the Get Lost Generation in an Age of Crisis. The CC-licensed book
was available in print form for purchase or online for free. To
- this day, the book—along with their CC-licensed guide Policies for
- Shareable Cities—are two of the biggest generators of traffic on
+ this day, the bookâalong with their CC-licensed guide Policies for
+ Shareable Citiesâare two of the biggest generators of traffic on
their website.
In 2016, Shareable self-published a book of curated Shareable
@@ -6786,21 +6786,21 @@
For Shareable, success is very much about their impact on the
world. This is true for Neal, but also for everyone who works for
- Shareable. “We attract passionate people,” Neal said.
+ Shareable. âWe attract passionate people,â Neal said.
At times, that means employees work so hard they burn out. Neal
tries to stress to the Shareable team that another part of success
is having fun and taking care of yourself while you do something
- you love. “A central part of human beings is that we long to
- be on a great adventure with people we love,” he said.
- “We are a species who look over the horizon and imagine and
+ you love. âA central part of human beings is that we long to
+ be on a great adventure with people we love,â he said.
+ âWe are a species who look over the horizon and imagine and
create new worlds, but we also seek the comfort of hearth and
- home.”
+ home.â
In 2013, Shareable ran its first crowdfunding campaign to launch
their Sharing Cities Network. Neal said at first they were on pace
to fail spectacularly. They called in their advisers in a panic
- and asked for help. The advice they received was simple—“Sit
- your ass in a chair and start making calls.” That’s exactly
+ and asked for help. The advice they received was simpleââSit
+ your ass in a chair and start making calls.â Thatâs exactly
what they did, and they ended up reaching their $50,000 goal. Neal
said the campaign helped them reach new people, but the vast
majority of backers were people in their existing base.
@@ -6814,10 +6814,10 @@
Shareable began hosting events in 2010. These events were designed
to bring the sharing community together. But over time they
realized they could reach far more people if they helped their
- readers to host their own events. “If we wanted to go big on
+ readers to host their own events. âIf we wanted to go big on
a conference, there was a huge risk and huge staffing needs, plus
only a fraction of our community could travel to the
- event,” Neal said. Enabling others to create their own
+ event,â Neal said. Enabling others to create their own
events around the globe allowed them to scale up their work more
effectively and reach far more people. Shareable has catalyzed
three hundred different events reaching over twenty thousand
@@ -6832,7 +6832,7 @@
Rather than a one-size-fits-all approach, Shareable puts the tools
out there for people take the ideas and adapt them to their own
communities.
- | |
+ | Â |
Siyavula is a for-profit educational-technology company that
creates textbooks and integrated learning experiences. Founded
in 2012 in South Africa.
@@ -6842,7 +6842,7 @@
custom services, sponsorships
Interview date: April 5, 2016
Interviewee: Mark Horner, CEO
- | | | | --\begin{flushright}
+ | Â | | Â | --\begin{flushright}
\textit{
Profile written by Paul Stacey
}
@@ -6855,21 +6855,21 @@
12 in South Africa.
In terms of creating an open business model that involves Creative
- Commons, Siyavula—and its founder, Mark Horner—have been around
+ Commons, Siyavulaâand its founder, Mark Hornerâhave been around
the block a few times. Siyavula has significantly shifted
- directions and strategies to survive and prosper. Mark says it’s
+ directions and strategies to survive and prosper. Mark says itâs
been very organic.
It all started in 2002, when Mark and several other colleagues at
the University of Cape Town in South Africa founded the Free High
School Science Texts project. Most students in South Africa high
- schools didn’t have access to high-quality, comprehensive science
+ schools didnât have access to high-quality, comprehensive science
and math textbooks, so Mark and his colleagues set out to write
them and make them freely available.
As physicists, Mark and his colleagues were advocates of
open-source software. To make the books open and free, they
- adopted the Free Software Foundation’s GNU Free Documentation
+ adopted the Free Software Foundationâs GNU Free Documentation
License. They chose LaTeX, a typesetting program used to
publish scientific documents, to author the books. Over a period
of five years, the Free High School Science Texts project produced
@@ -6878,12 +6878,12 @@
In 2007, the Shuttleworth Foundation offered funding support to
make the textbooks available for trial use at more schools.
Surveys before and after the textbooks were adopted showed there
- were no substantial criticisms of the textbooks’ pedagogical
+ were no substantial criticisms of the textbooksâ pedagogical
content. This pleased both the authors and Shuttleworth; Mark
remains incredibly proud of this accomplishment.
But the development of new textbooks froze at this stage. Mark
- shifted his focus to rural schools, which didn’t have textbooks at
+ shifted his focus to rural schools, which didnât have textbooks at
all, and looked into the printing and distribution options. A few
sponsors came on board but not enough to meet the need.
@@ -6892,24 +6892,24 @@
in Cape Town. One result was the Cape Town Open Education
Declaration, a statement of principles, strategies, and commitment
to help the open-education movement grow. Shuttleworth also invited Mark to run a project
- writing open content for all subjects for K–12 in English. That
+ writing open content for all subjects for Kâ12 in English. That
project became Siyavula.
They wrote six original textbooks. A small publishing company
- offered Shuttleworth the option to buy out the publisher’s
- existing K–9 content for every subject in South African schools in
+ offered Shuttleworth the option to buy out the publisherâs
+ existing Kâ9 content for every subject in South African schools in
both English and Afrikaans. A deal was struck, and all the
acquired content was licensed with Creative Commons, significantly
expanding the collection beyond the six original books.
Mark wanted to build out the remaining curricula collaboratively
- through communities of practice—that is, with fellow educators and
+ through communities of practiceâthat is, with fellow educators and
writers. Although sharing is fundamental to teaching, there can be
a few challenges when you create educational resources
collectively. One concern is legal. It is standard practice in
education to copy diagrams and snippets of text, but of course
- this doesn’t always comply with copyright law. Another concern is
- transparency. Sharing what you’ve authored means everyone can see
+ this doesnât always comply with copyright law. Another concern is
+ transparency. Sharing what youâve authored means everyone can see
it and opens you up to criticism. To alleviate these concerns,
Mark adopted a team-based approach to authoring and insisted the
curricula be based entirely on resources with Creative Commons
@@ -6919,14 +6919,14 @@
Not only did Mark want the resources to be shareable, he wanted
all teachers to be able to remix and edit the content. Mark and
his team had to come up with an open editable format and provide
- tools for editing. They ended up putting all the books they’d
+ tools for editing. They ended up putting all the books theyâd
acquired and authored on a platform called Connexions. Siyavula trained many teachers to use Connexions, but
it proved to be too complex and the textbooks were rarely edited.
Then the Shuttleworth Foundation decided to completely restructure
its work as a foundation into a fellowship model (for reasons
completely unrelated to Siyavula). As part of that transition in
- 2009–10, Mark inherited Siyavula as an independent entity and took
+ 2009â10, Mark inherited Siyavula as an independent entity and took
ownership over it as a Shuttleworth fellow.
Mark and his team experimented with several different strategies.
@@ -6949,15 +6949,15 @@
could drive vast amounts of traffic to their website. In addition
to print books, Siyavula could also make the books available on
their website, making it possible for learners to access them
- using any device—computer, tablet, or mobile phone.
+ using any deviceâcomputer, tablet, or mobile phone.
Mark and his team began imagining what they could develop beyond
what was in the textbooks as a service they charge for. One key
- thing you can’t do well in a printed textbook is demonstrate
+ thing you canât do well in a printed textbook is demonstrate
solutions. Typically, a one-line answer is given at the end of the
book but nothing on the process for arriving at that solution.
Mark and his team developed practice items and detailed solutions,
- giving learners plenty of opportunity to test out what they’ve
+ giving learners plenty of opportunity to test out what theyâve
learned. Furthermore, an algorithm could adapt these practice
items to the individual needs of each learner. They called this
service Intelligent Practice and embedded links to it in the open
@@ -6973,13 +6973,13 @@
Rather than wait, schools who could afford it provided students
with a different textbook. The Siyavula books were eventually
distributed, but with well-off schools mainly using a different
- book, the primary market for Siyavula’s Intelligent Practice
+ book, the primary market for Siyavulaâs Intelligent Practice
service inadvertently became low-income learners.
- Siyavula’s site did see a dramatic increase in traffic. They got
+ Siyavulaâs site did see a dramatic increase in traffic. They got
five hundred thousand visitors per month to their math site and
the same number to their science site. Two-fifths of the traffic
- was reading on a “feature phone” (a nonsmartphone
+ was reading on a âfeature phoneâ (a nonsmartphone
with no apps). People on basic phones were reading math and
science on a two-inch screen at all hours of the day. To Mark, it
was quite amazing and spoke to a need they were servicing.
@@ -6988,25 +6988,25 @@
using a credit card. This proved problematic, especially for those
in the low-income demographic, as credit cards were not prevalent.
Mark says Siyavula got a harsh business-model lesson early on. As
- he describes it, it’s not just about product, but how you sell it,
+ he describes it, itâs not just about product, but how you sell it,
who the market is, what the price is, and what the barriers to
entry are.
- Mark describes this as the first version of Siyavula’s business
+ Mark describes this as the first version of Siyavulaâs business
model: open textbooks serving as marketing material and driving
traffic to your site, where you can offer a related service and
convert some people into a paid customer.
- For Mark a key decision for Siyavula’s business was to focus on
- how they can add value on top of their basic service. They’ll
+ For Mark a key decision for Siyavulaâs business was to focus on
+ how they can add value on top of their basic service. Theyâll
charge only if they are adding unique value. The actual content of
- the textbook isn’t unique at all, so Siyavula sees no value in
+ the textbook isnât unique at all, so Siyavula sees no value in
locking it down and charging for it. Mark contrasts this with
traditional publishers who charge over and over again for the same
content without adding value.
- Version two of Siyavula’s business model was a big, ambitious
- idea—scale up. They also decided to sell the Intelligent Practice
+ Version two of Siyavulaâs business model was a big, ambitious
+ ideaâscale up. They also decided to sell the Intelligent Practice
service to schools directly. Schools can subscribe on a
per-student, per-subject basis. A single subscription gives a
learner access to a single subject, including practice content
@@ -7016,11 +7016,11 @@
schools where both the science and math departments subscribe.
Teachers get a dashboard that allows them to monitor the progress
- of an entire class or view an individual learner’s results. They
+ of an entire class or view an individual learnerâs results. They
can see the questions that learners are working on, identify areas
of difficulty, and be more strategic in their teaching. Students
also have their own personalized dashboard, where they can view
- the sections they’ve practiced, how many points they’ve earned,
+ the sections theyâve practiced, how many points theyâve earned,
and how their performance is improving.
Based on the success of this effort, Siyavula decided to
@@ -7033,8 +7033,8 @@
In partnership with, and sponsored by, the Sasol Inzalo
Foundation, Siyavula produced a series of natural sciences and
technology workbooks for grades 4 to 6 called Thunderbolt Kids
- that uses a fun comic-book style. It’s a complete curriculum that also comes with
- teacher’s guides and other resources.
+ that uses a fun comic-book style. Itâs a complete curriculum that also comes with
+ teacherâs guides and other resources.
Through this experience, Siyavula learned they could get sponsors
to help fund openly licensed textbooks. It helped that Siyavula
@@ -7046,8 +7046,8 @@
one million students.
The Siyavula books that are reviewed, approved, and branded by the
- government are freely and openly available on Siyavula’s website
- under an Attribution-NoDerivs license (CC BY-ND) —NoDerivs means
+ government are freely and openly available on Siyavulaâs website
+ under an Attribution-NoDerivs license (CC BY-ND) âNoDerivs means
that these books cannot be modified. Non-government-branded books
are available under an Attribution license (CC BY), allowing
others to modify and redistribute the books.
@@ -7056,7 +7056,7 @@
hard copies of the books to schoolkids, Siyavula itself received
no funding from the government. Siyavula initially tried to
convince the government to provide them with five rand per book
- (about US35¢). With those funds, Mark says that Siyavula could
+ (about US35¢). With those funds, Mark says that Siyavula could
have run its entire operation, built a community-based model for
producing more books, and provide Intelligent Practice for free to
every child in the country. But after a lengthy negotiation, the
@@ -7075,13 +7075,13 @@
textbooks even more, the South African government changed its
textbook policy. To save costs, the government declared there
would be only one authorized textbook for each grade and each
- subject. There was no guarantee that Siyavula’s would be chosen.
+ subject. There was no guarantee that Siyavulaâs would be chosen.
This scared away potential sponsors.
Rather than producing more textbooks, Siyavula focused on
improving its Intelligent Practice technology for its existing
- books. Mark calls this version three of Siyavula’s business
- model—focusing on the technology that provides the
+ books. Mark calls this version three of Siyavulaâs business
+ modelâfocusing on the technology that provides the
revenue-generating service and generating more users of this
service. Version three got a significant boost in 2014 with an
investment by the Omidyar Network (the philanthropic venture
@@ -7102,9 +7102,9 @@
nonpersonal data Intelligent Practice collects.
Siyavula is a for-profit business but one with a social mission.
- Their shareholders’ agreement lists lots of requirements around
+ Their shareholdersâ agreement lists lots of requirements around
openness for Siyavula, including stipulations that content always
- be put under an open license and that they can’t charge for
+ be put under an open license and that they canât charge for
something that people volunteered to do for them. They believe
each individual should have access to the resources and support
they need to achieve the education they deserve. Having
@@ -7114,7 +7114,7 @@
of Siyavula. In terms of open business models, Mark and Siyavula
may have been around the block a few times, but both he and the
company are stronger for it.
- | |
+ | Â |
SparkFun is an online electronics retailer specializing in open
hardware. Founded in 2003 in the U.S.
@@ -7125,7 +7125,7 @@
2016
Interviewee: Nathan Seidle,
founder
- | | | | --\begin{flushright}
+ | Â | | Â | --\begin{flushright}
\textit{
Profile written by Sarah Hinchliff Pearson
}
@@ -7135,10 +7135,10 @@
market in China, with a huge grin on his face. He was traveling in
China when he came across their LilyPad wearable technology being
made by someone else. His reaction was glee.
- “Being copied is the greatest earmark of flattery and
- success,” Nathan said. “I thought it was so cool that
+ âBeing copied is the greatest earmark of flattery and
+ success,â Nathan said. âI thought it was so cool that
they were selling to a market we were never going to get access to
- otherwise. It was evidence of our impact on the world.”
+ otherwise. It was evidence of our impact on the world.â
This worldview runs through everything SparkFun does. SparkFun is
an electronics manufacturer. The company sells its products
@@ -7148,43 +7148,43 @@
images, tutorial content, and curricula, so anyone can make their
products on their own. Being copied is part of the design.
- Nathan believes open licensing is good for the world. “It
- touches on our natural human instinct to share,” he said.
+ Nathan believes open licensing is good for the world. âIt
+ touches on our natural human instinct to share,â he said.
But he also strongly believes it makes SparkFun better at what
they do. They encourage copying, and their products are copied at
a very fast rate, often within ten to twelve weeks of release.
This forces the company to compete on something other than product
design, or what most commonly consider their intellectual
property.
- “We compete on business principles,” Nathan said.
- “Claiming your territory with intellectual property allows
+ âWe compete on business principles,â Nathan said.
+ âClaiming your territory with intellectual property allows
you to get comfy and rest on your laurels. It gives you a safety
- net. We took away that safety net.”
+ net. We took away that safety net.â
The result is an intense company-wide focus on product development
- and improvement. “Our products are so much better than they
- were five years ago,” Nathan said. “We used to just
- sell products. Now it’s a product plus a video, a seventeen-page
+ and improvement. âOur products are so much better than they
+ were five years ago,â Nathan said. âWe used to just
+ sell products. Now itâs a product plus a video, a seventeen-page
hookup guide, and example firmware on three different platforms to
get you up and running faster. We have gotten better because we
- had to in order to compete. As painful as it is for us, it’s
- better for the customers.”
+ had to in order to compete. As painful as it is for us, itâs
+ better for the customers.â
SparkFun parts are available on eBay for lower prices. But people
come directly to SparkFun because SparkFun makes their lives
easier. The example code works; there is a service number to call;
they ship replacement parts the day they get a service call. They
- invest heavily in service and support. “I don’t believe
+ invest heavily in service and support. âI donât believe
businesses should be competing with IP [intellectual property]
- barriers,” Nathan said. “This is the stuff they
- should be competing on.”
+ barriers,â Nathan said. âThis is the stuff they
+ should be competing on.â
- SparkFun’s company history began in Nathan’s college dorm room. He
+ SparkFunâs company history began in Nathanâs college dorm room. He
spent a lot of time experimenting with and building electronics,
- and he realized there was a void in the market. “If you
- wanted to place an order for something,” he said,
- “you first had to search far and wide to find it, and then
- you had to call or fax someone.” In 2003, during his third
+ and he realized there was a void in the market. âIf you
+ wanted to place an order for something,â he said,
+ âyou first had to search far and wide to find it, and then
+ you had to call or fax someone.â In 2003, during his third
year of college, he registered
http://sparkfun.com and started reselling
products out of his bedroom. After he graduated, he started making
@@ -7193,18 +7193,18 @@
Once he started designing his own products, he began putting the
software and schematics online to help with technical support.
After doing some research on licensing options, he chose Creative
- Commons licenses because he was drawn to the “human-readable
- deeds” that explain the licensing terms in simple terms.
+ Commons licenses because he was drawn to the âhuman-readable
+ deedsâ that explain the licensing terms in simple terms.
SparkFun still uses CC licenses for all of the schematics and
firmware for the products they create.
The company has grown from a solo project to a corporation with
140 employees. In 2015, SparkFun earned $33 million in revenue.
Selling components and widgets to hobbyists, professionals, and
- artists remains a major part of SparkFun’s business. They sell
+ artists remains a major part of SparkFunâs business. They sell
their own products, but they also partner with Arduino (also
profiled in this book) by manufacturing boards for resale using
- Arduino’s brand.
+ Arduinoâs brand.
SparkFun also has an educational department dedicated to creating
a hands-on curriculum to teach students about electronics using
@@ -7212,17 +7212,17 @@
enabling others to re-create and fix their products on their own,
the more recent focus on introducing young people to technology is
a natural extension of their core business.
- “We have the burden and opportunity to educate the next
- generation of technical citizens,” Nathan said. “Our
+ âWe have the burden and opportunity to educate the next
+ generation of technical citizens,â Nathan said. âOur
goal is to affect the lives of three hundred and fifty thousand
- high school students by 2020.”
+ high school students by 2020.â
- The Creative Commons license underlying all of SparkFun’s products
+ The Creative Commons license underlying all of SparkFunâs products
is central to this mission. The license not only signals a
willingness to share, but it also expresses a desire for others to
get in and tinker with their products, both to learn and to make
their products better. SparkFun uses the Attribution-ShareAlike
- license (CC BY-SA), which is a “copyleft” license
+ license (CC BY-SA), which is a âcopyleftâ license
that allows people to do anything with the content as long as they
provide credit and make any adaptations available under the same
licensing terms.
@@ -7242,57 +7242,57 @@
technology enthusiasts from around the area to race their own
self-created bots against each other, participate in training
workshops, and socialize. From a business perspective, Nathan says
- it’s a terrible idea. But they don’t hold the event for business
- reasons. “The reason we do it is because I get to travel and
+ itâs a terrible idea. But they donât hold the event for business
+ reasons. âThe reason we do it is because I get to travel and
have interactions with our customers all the time, but most of our
- employees don’t,” he said. “This event gives our
+ employees donât,â he said. âThis event gives our
employees the opportunity to get face-to-face contact with our
- customers.” The event infuses their work with a human
+ customers.â The event infuses their work with a human
element, which makes it more meaningful.
Nathan has worked hard to imbue a deeper meaning into the work
SparkFun does. The company is, of course, focused on being
fiscally responsible, but they are ultimately driven by something
- other than money. “Profit is not the goal; it is the outcome
- of a well-executed plan,” Nathan said. “We focus on
- having a bigger impact on the world.” Nathan believes they
+ other than money. âProfit is not the goal; it is the outcome
+ of a well-executed plan,â Nathan said. âWe focus on
+ having a bigger impact on the world.â Nathan believes they
get some of the brightest and most amazing employees because they
- aren’t singularly focused on the bottom line.
+ arenât singularly focused on the bottom line.
The company is committed to transparency and shares all of its
financials with its employees. They also generally strive to avoid
being another soulless corporation. They actively try to reveal
the humans behind the company, and they work to ensure people
- coming to their site don’t find only unchanging content.
+ coming to their site donât find only unchanging content.
- SparkFun’s customer base is largely made up of industrious
+ SparkFunâs customer base is largely made up of industrious
electronics enthusiasts. They have customers who are regularly
- involved in the company’s customer support, independently
+ involved in the companyâs customer support, independently
responding to questions in forums and product-comment sections.
Customers also bring product ideas to the company. SparkFun
regularly sifts through suggestions from customers and tries to
- build on them where they can. “From the beginning, we have
- been listening to the community,” Nathan said.
- “Customers would identify a pain point, and we would design
- something to address it.”
+ build on them where they can. âFrom the beginning, we have
+ been listening to the community,â Nathan said.
+ âCustomers would identify a pain point, and we would design
+ something to address it.â
However, this sort of customer engagement does not always
- translate to people actively contributing to SparkFun’s projects.
+ translate to people actively contributing to SparkFunâs projects.
The company has a public repository of software code for each of
its devices online. On a particularly active project, there will
only be about two dozen people contributing significant
improvements. The vast majority of projects are relatively
- untouched by the public. “There is a theory that if you
- open-source it, they will come,” Nathan said. “That’s
- not really true.”
+ untouched by the public. âThere is a theory that if you
+ open-source it, they will come,â Nathan said. âThatâs
+ not really true.â
Rather than focusing on cocreation with their customers, SparkFun
instead focuses on enabling people to copy, tinker, and improve
products on their own. They heavily invest in tutorials and other
material designed to help people understand how the products work
- so they can fix and improve things independently. “What
+ so they can fix and improve things independently. âWhat
gives me joy is when people take open-source layouts and then
- build their own circuit boards from our designs,” Nathan
+ build their own circuit boards from our designs,â Nathan
said.
Obviously, opening up the design of their products is a necessary
@@ -7306,7 +7306,7 @@
may lose a few dollars when others copy their products. But in the
long run, it makes them a more nimble, innovative business. In
other words, it makes them the kind of company they set out to be.
- | |
+ | Â |
TeachAIDS is a nonprofit that creates educational materials
designed to teach people around the world about HIV and AIDS.
Founded in 2005 in the U.S.
@@ -7317,7 +7317,7 @@
2016
Interviewees: Piya Sorcar,
the CEO, and Shuman Ghosemajumder, the chair
- | | | | --\begin{flushright}
+ | Â | | Â | --\begin{flushright}
\textit{
Profile written by Sarah Hinchliff Pearson
}
@@ -7361,15 +7361,15 @@
In late 2005, Piya and her team used research-based design to
create new educational materials and worked with local partners in
India to help distribute them. As soon as the animated software
- was posted online, Piya’s team started receiving requests from
+ was posted online, Piyaâs team started receiving requests from
individuals and governments who were interested in bringing this
- model to more countries. “We realized fairly quickly that
+ model to more countries. âWe realized fairly quickly that
educating large populations about a topic that was considered
taboo would be challenging. We began by identifying optimal local
partners and worked toward creating an effective, culturally
- appropriate education,” Piya said.
+ appropriate education,â Piya said.
- Very shortly after the initial release, Piya’s team decided to
+ Very shortly after the initial release, Piyaâs team decided to
spin the endeavor into an independent nonprofit out of Stanford
University. They also decided to use Creative Commons licenses on
the materials.
@@ -7380,22 +7380,22 @@
in the content. They chose the Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs
license (CC BY-NC-ND), which essentially gives the public the
right to distribute only verbatim copies of the content, and for
- noncommercial purposes. “We wanted attribution for
- TeachAIDS, and we couldn’t stand by derivatives without vetting
- them,” the cofounder and chair Shuman Ghosemajumder said.
- “It was almost a no-brainer to go with a CC license because
+ noncommercial purposes. âWe wanted attribution for
+ TeachAIDS, and we couldnât stand by derivatives without vetting
+ them,â the cofounder and chair Shuman Ghosemajumder said.
+ âIt was almost a no-brainer to go with a CC license because
it was a plug-and-play solution to this exact problem. It has
allowed us to scale our materials safely and quickly worldwide
while preserving our content and protecting us at the same
- time.”
+ time.â
Choosing a license that does not allow adaptation of the content
was an outgrowth of the careful precision with which TeachAIDS
crafts their content. The organization invests heavily in research
and testing to determine the best method of conveying the
- information. “Creating high-quality content is what matters
- most to us,” Piya said. “Research drives everything
- we do.”
+ information. âCreating high-quality content is what matters
+ most to us,â Piya said. âResearch drives everything
+ we do.â
One important finding was that people accept the message best when
it comes from familiar voices they trust and admire. To achieve
@@ -7447,23 +7447,23 @@
is undertaken entirely by people who are specifically brought on
to help with a particular project, rather than ongoing staff. The
final product they create is designed to require zero training for
- people to implement in practice. “In our research, we found
- we can’t depend on people passing on the information correctly,
- even if they have the best of intentions,” Piya said.
- “We need materials where you can push play and they will
- work.”
+ people to implement in practice. âIn our research, we found
+ we canât depend on people passing on the information correctly,
+ even if they have the best of intentions,â Piya said.
+ âWe need materials where you can push play and they will
+ work.â
- Piya’s team was able to produce all of these versions over several
+ Piyaâs team was able to produce all of these versions over several
years with a head count that never exceeded eight full-time
employees. The organization is able to reduce costs by relying
heavily on volunteers and in-kind donations. Nevertheless, the
nonprofit needed a sustainable revenue model to subsidize content
creation and physical distribution of the materials. Charging even
- a low price was simply not an option. “Educators from
+ a low price was simply not an option. âEducators from
various nonprofits around the world were just creating their own
- materials using whatever they could find for free online,”
- Shuman said. “The only way to persuade them to use our
- highly effective model was to make it completely free.”
+ materials using whatever they could find for free online,â
+ Shuman said. âThe only way to persuade them to use our
+ highly effective model was to make it completely free.â
Like many content creators offering their work for free, they
settled on advertising as a funding model. But they were extremely
@@ -7480,14 +7480,14 @@
unrestricted donations to the nonprofit. This gives the nonprofit
more stability, but even more importantly, it enables them to
subsidize projects being localized for an area with no sponsors.
- “If we just created versions based on where we could get
+ âIf we just created versions based on where we could get
sponsorships, we would only have materials for wealthier
- countries,” Shuman said.
+ countries,â Shuman said.
- As of 2016, TeachAIDS has dozens of sponsors. “When we go
+ As of 2016, TeachAIDS has dozens of sponsors. âWhen we go
into a new country, various companies hear about us and reach out
- to us,” Piya said. “We don’t have to do much to find
- or attract them.” They believe the sponsorships are easy to
+ to us,â Piya said. âWe donât have to do much to find
+ or attract them.â They believe the sponsorships are easy to
sell because they offer so much value to sponsors. TeachAIDS
sponsorships give corporations the chance to reach new eyeballs
with their brand, but at a much lower cost than other advertising
@@ -7500,19 +7500,19 @@
Importantly, the value to corporate sponsors goes beyond
commercial considerations. As a nonprofit with a clearly
articulated social mission, corporate sponsorships are donations
- to a cause. “This is something companies can be proud of
- internally,” Shuman said. Some companies have even built
+ to a cause. âThis is something companies can be proud of
+ internally,â Shuman said. Some companies have even built
publicity campaigns around the fact that they have sponsored these
initiatives.
- The core mission of TeachAIDS—ensuring global access to
- life-saving education—is at the root of everything the
+ The core mission of TeachAIDSâensuring global access to
+ life-saving educationâis at the root of everything the
organization does. It underpins the work; it motivates the
funders. The CC license on the materials they create furthers that
mission, allowing them to safely and quickly scale their materials
- worldwide. “The Creative Commons license has been a game
- changer for TeachAIDS,” Piya said.
- Chapter 26. Tribe of Noise| |
+ worldwide. âThe Creative Commons license has been a game
+ changer for TeachAIDS,â Piya said.
+ Chapter 26. Tribe of Noise|  |
Tribe of Noise is a for-profit online music platform serving the
film, TV, video, gaming, and in-store-media industries. Founded
in 2008 in the Netherlands.
@@ -7524,7 +7524,7 @@
2016
Interviewee: Hessel van
Oorschot, cofounder
- | | | | --\begin{flushright}
+ | Â | | Â | --\begin{flushright}
\textit{
Profile written by Paul Stacey
}
@@ -7550,8 +7550,8 @@
uncovered five or six examples, Hessel found the business models
lacking. The lawyers expressed interest in being their legal team
should they decide to pursue this as an entrepreneurial
- opportunity. Hessel says, “When lawyers are interested in a
- venture like this, you might have something special.” So
+ opportunity. Hessel says, âWhen lawyers are interested in a
+ venture like this, you might have something special.â So
after some more research, in early 2008, Hessel and Sandra decided
to build a platform.
@@ -7588,40 +7588,40 @@
Hessel and his legal team reached out to collecting societies,
starting with those in the Netherlands. What would be the best
legal way forward that would respect the wishes of composers and
- musicians who’d be interested in trying out new models like the
+ musicians whoâd be interested in trying out new models like the
In-store Music Service? Collecting societies at first were
hesitant and said no, but Tribe of Noise persisted arguing that
they primarily work with unknown artists and provide them exposure
- in parts of the world where they don’t get airtime normally and a
- source of revenue—and this convinced them that it was OK. However,
- Hessel says, “We are still fighting for a good cause every
- single day.”
+ in parts of the world where they donât get airtime normally and a
+ source of revenueâand this convinced them that it was OK. However,
+ Hessel says, âWe are still fighting for a good cause every
+ single day.â
Instead of building a large sales force, Tribe of Noise partnered
with big organizations who have lots of clients and can act as a
kind of Tribe of Noise reseller. The largest telecom network in
- the Netherlands, for example, sells Tribe’s In-store Music Service
+ the Netherlands, for example, sells Tribeâs In-store Music Service
subscriptions to their business clients, which include fashion
retailers and fitness centers. They have a similar deal with the
leading trade association representing hotels and restaurants in
- the country. Hessel hopes to “copy and paste” this
+ the country. Hessel hopes to âcopy and pasteâ this
service into other countries where collecting societies understand
what you can do with Creative Commons. Outside of the Netherlands,
early adoptions have happened in Scandinavia, Belgium, and the
U.S.
- Tribe of Noise doesn’t pay the musicians up front; they get paid
- when their music ends up in Tribe of Noise’s in-store music
- channels. The musicians’ share is 42.5 percent. It’s not uncommon
+ Tribe of Noise doesnât pay the musicians up front; they get paid
+ when their music ends up in Tribe of Noiseâs in-store music
+ channels. The musiciansâ share is 42.5 percent. Itâs not uncommon
in a traditional model for the artist to get only 5 to 10 percent,
so a share of over 40 percent is a significantly better deal.
- Here’s how they give an example on their website:
+ Hereâs how they give an example on their website:
A few of your songs [licensed with CC BY-SA], for example five in
total, are selected for a bespoke in-store music channel
broadcasting at a large retailer with 1,000 stores nationwide. In
this case the overall playlist contains 350 songs so the
- musician’s share is 5/350 = 1.43%. The license fee agreed with
+ musicianâs share is 5/350 = 1.43%. The license fee agreed with
this retailer is US$12 per month per play-out. So if 42.5% is
shared with the Tribe musicians in this playlist and your share is
1.43%, you end up with US$12 * 1000 stores * 0.425 * 0.0143 =
@@ -7637,11 +7637,11 @@
license would preclude them getting rich off the sale of that
song.
- Hessel’s legal team took this feedback and created a second model
+ Hesselâs legal team took this feedback and created a second model
and separate area of the platform called Tribe of Noise Pro. Songs
- uploaded to Tribe of Noise Pro aren’t Creative Commons licensed;
- Tribe of Noise has instead created a “nonexclusive
- exploitation” contract, similar to a Creative Commons
+ uploaded to Tribe of Noise Pro arenât Creative Commons licensed;
+ Tribe of Noise has instead created a ânonexclusive
+ exploitationâ contract, similar to a Creative Commons
license but allowing musicians to opt out whenever they want. When
you opt out, Tribe of Noise agrees to take your music off the
Tribe of Noise platform within one to two months. This lets the
@@ -7649,13 +7649,13 @@
Tribe of Noise Pro is primarily geared toward media makers who are
looking for music. If they buy a license from this catalog, they
- don’t have to state the name of the creator; they just license the
+ donât have to state the name of the creator; they just license the
song for a specific amount. This is a big plus for media makers.
And musicians can pull their repertoire at any time. Hessel sees
this as a more direct and clean deal.
Lots of Tribe of Noise musicians upload songs to both Tribe of
- Noise Pro and the community area of Tribe of Noises. There aren’t
+ Noise Pro and the community area of Tribe of Noises. There arenât
that many artists who upload only to Tribe of Noise Pro, which has
a smaller repertoire of music than the community area.
@@ -7696,7 +7696,7 @@
model by licensing some of their songs under CC BY-SA and opting
in others with collecting societies like ASCAP or BMI.
- It’s not uncommon for performance-rights organizations, record
+ Itâs not uncommon for performance-rights organizations, record
labels, or music publishers to sign contracts with musicians based
on exclusivity. Such an arrangement prevents those musicians from
uploading their music to Tribe of Noise. In the United States, you
@@ -7712,7 +7712,7 @@
far, Tribe of Noise has been able to make all this work without
litigation.
- For Hessel the key to Tribe of Noise’s success is trust. The fact
+ For Hessel the key to Tribe of Noiseâs success is trust. The fact
that Creative Commons licenses work the same way all over the
world and have been translated into all languages really helps
build that trust. Tribe of Noise believes in creating a model
@@ -7720,8 +7720,8 @@
they have a live and kicking community, with people who think that
the Tribe of Noise team has their best interests in mind. Creative
Commons makes it possible to create a new business model for
- music, a model that’s based on trust.
- Chapter 27. Wikimedia Foundation| |
+ music, a model thatâs based on trust.
+ Chapter 27. Wikimedia Foundation|  |
The Wikimedia Foundation is the nonprofit organization that
hosts Wikipedia and its sister projects. Founded in 2003 in the
U.S.
@@ -7733,7 +7733,7 @@
Interviewees: Luis Villa,
former Chief Officer of Community Engagement, and Stephen
LaPorte, legal counsel
- | | | | --\begin{flushright}
+ | Â | | Â | --\begin{flushright}
\textit{
Profile written by Sarah Hinchliff Pearson
}
@@ -7749,7 +7749,7 @@
As of December 2016, there were more than forty-two million
articles in the 295 language editions of the online encyclopedia,
- according to—what else?—the Wikipedia article about Wikipedia.
+ according toâwhat else?âthe Wikipedia article about Wikipedia.
The Wikimedia Foundation is a U.S.-based nonprofit organization
that owns the Wikipedia domain name and hosts the site, along with
@@ -7764,16 +7764,16 @@
groups focused on a particular theme, user groups, and many
thousands who are not connected to a particular organization.
- As Wikimedia legal counsel Stephen LaPorte told us, “There
+ As Wikimedia legal counsel Stephen LaPorte told us, âThere
is a common saying that Wikipedia works in practice but not in
- theory.” While it undoubtedly has its challenges and flaws,
+ theory.â While it undoubtedly has its challenges and flaws,
Wikipedia and its sister projects are a striking testament to the
power of human collaboration.
Because of its extraordinary breadth and scope, it does feel a bit
like a unicorn. Indeed, there is nothing else like Wikipedia.
- Still, much of what makes the projects successful—community,
- transparency, a strong mission, trust—are consistent with what it
+ Still, much of what makes the projects successfulâcommunity,
+ transparency, a strong mission, trustâare consistent with what it
takes to be successfully Made with Creative Commons more
generally. With Wikipedia, everything just happens at an
unprecedented scale.
@@ -7790,8 +7790,8 @@
thousand edits are made every hour.
The nature of the content the community creates is ideal for
- asynchronous cocreation. “An encyclopedia is something where
- incremental community improvement really works,” Luis
+ asynchronous cocreation. âAn encyclopedia is something where
+ incremental community improvement really works,â Luis
Villa, former Chief Officer of Community Engagement, told us. The
rules and processes that govern cocreation on Wikipedia and its
sister projects are all community-driven and vary by language
@@ -7802,29 +7802,29 @@
process includes elaborate systems to resolve disputes, methods
for managing particularly controversial subject areas, talk pages
explaining decisions, and much, much more. The Wikimedia
- Foundation’s decision to leave governance of the projects to the
- community is very deliberate. “We look at the things that
+ Foundationâs decision to leave governance of the projects to the
+ community is very deliberate. âWe look at the things that
the community can do well, and we want to let them do those
- things,” Stephen told us. Instead, the foundation focuses
+ things,â Stephen told us. Instead, the foundation focuses
its time and resources on what the community cannot do as
effectively, like the software engineering that supports the
technical infrastructure of the sites. In 2015-16, about half of
- the foundation’s budget went to direct support for the Wikimedia
+ the foundationâs budget went to direct support for the Wikimedia
sites.
Some of that is directed at servers and general IT support, but
the foundation also invests a significant amount on architecture
designed to help the site function as effectively as possible.
- “There is a constantly evolving system to keep the balance
- in place to avoid Wikipedia becoming the world’s biggest graffiti
- wall,” Luis said. Depending on how you measure it,
+ âThere is a constantly evolving system to keep the balance
+ in place to avoid Wikipedia becoming the worldâs biggest graffiti
+ wall,â Luis said. Depending on how you measure it,
somewhere between 90 to 98 percent of edits to Wikipedia are
positive. Some portion of that success is attributable to the
tools Wikimedia has in place to try to incentivize good actors.
- “The secret to having any healthy community is bringing back
- the right people,” Luis said. “Vandals tend to get
+ âThe secret to having any healthy community is bringing back
+ the right people,â Luis said. âVandals tend to get
bored and go away. That is partially our model working, and
- partially just human nature.” Most of the time, people want
+ partially just human nature.â Most of the time, people want
to do the right thing.
Wikipedia not only relies on good behavior within its community
@@ -7834,27 +7834,27 @@
be used for any purpose and modified so long as credit is given
and anything new is shared back with the public under the same
license. In theory, that means anyone can copy the content and
- start a new Wikipedia. But as Stephen explained, “Being open
+ start a new Wikipedia. But as Stephen explained, âBeing open
has only made Wikipedia bigger and stronger. The desire to protect
- is not always what is best for everyone.”
+ is not always what is best for everyone.â
Of course, the primary reason no one has successfully co-opted
Wikipedia is that copycat efforts do not have the Wikipedia
community to sustain what they do. Wikipedia is not simply a
- source of up-to-the-minute content on every given topic—it is also
+ source of up-to-the-minute content on every given topicâit is also
a global patchwork of humans working together in a million
different ways, in a million different capacities, for a million
different reasons. While many have tried to guess what makes
Wikipedia work as well it does, the fact is there is no single
- explanation. “In a movement as large as ours, there is an
- incredible diversity of motivations,” Stephen said. For
+ explanation. âIn a movement as large as ours, there is an
+ incredible diversity of motivations,â Stephen said. For
example, there is one editor of the English Wikipedia edition who
has corrected a single grammatical error in articles more than
forty-eight thousand times. Only a fraction of Wikipedia users are also editors.
But editing is not the only way to contribute to Wikipedia.
- “Some donate text, some donate images, some donate
- financially,” Stephen told us. “They are all
- contributors.”
+ âSome donate text, some donate images, some donate
+ financially,â Stephen told us. âThey are all
+ contributors.â
But the vast majority of us who use Wikipedia are not
contributors; we are passive readers. The Wikimedia Foundation
@@ -7890,32 +7890,32 @@
Any given edit on Wikipedia could be motivated by nearly an
infinite number of reasons. But the social mission of the project
- is what binds the global community together. “Wikipedia is
+ is what binds the global community together. âWikipedia is
an example of how a mission can motivate an entire
- movement,” Stephen told us.
+ movement,â Stephen told us.
Of course, what results from that movement is one of the
- Internet’s great public resources. “The Internet has a lot
+ Internetâs great public resources. âThe Internet has a lot
of businesses and stores, but it is missing the digital equivalent
- of parks and open public spaces,” Stephen said.
- “Wikipedia has found a way to be that open public
- space.”
+ of parks and open public spaces,â Stephen said.
+ âWikipedia has found a way to be that open public
+ space.â
\chapter*{Bibliography}\addcontentsline{toc}{chapter}{Bibliography}
Alperovitz, Gar. What Then Must We Do? Straight Talk about the Next
American Revolution; Democratizing Wealth and Building a
Community-Sustaining Economy from the Ground Up. White River
Junction, VT: Chelsea Green, 2013.
- Anderson, Chris. Free: How Today’s Smartest Businesses Profit by
+ Anderson, Chris. Free: How Todayâs Smartest Businesses Profit by
Giving Something for Nothing, reprint with new preface. New York:
Hyperion, 2010.
- ———. Makers: The New Industrial Revolution. New York: Signal, 2012.
+ âââ. Makers: The New Industrial Revolution. New York: Signal, 2012.
Ariely, Dan. Predictably Irrational: The Hidden Forces That Shape
- Our Decisions. Rev. ed. New York: Harper Perennial, 2010.
+ Our Decisions. Rev. ed. New York: Harper Perennial, 2010.
- Bacon, Jono. The Art of Community. 2nd ed. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly
+ Bacon, Jono. The Art of Community. 2nd ed. Sebastopol, CA: OâReilly
Media, 2012.
Benkler, Yochai. The Wealth of Networks: How Social Production
@@ -7934,13 +7934,13 @@
Collaborative, 2016.
http://thenextsystem.org/commoning-as-a-transformative-social-paradigm/.
- ———. Think Like a Commoner: A Short Introduction to the Life of the
+ âââ. Think Like a Commoner: A Short Introduction to the Life of the
Commons. Gabriola Island, BC: New Society, 2014.
Bollier, David, and Pat Conaty. Democratic Money and Capital for the
Commons: Strategies for Transforming Neoliberal Finance through
Commons-Based Alternatives. A report on a Commons Strategies Group
- Workshop in cooperation with the Heinrich Böll Foundation, Berlin,
+ Workshop in cooperation with the Heinrich Böll Foundation, Berlin,
Germany, 2015.
http://bollier.org/democratic-money-and-capital-commons-report-pdf.
For more information, see
@@ -7949,7 +7949,7 @@
Bollier, David, and Silke Helfrich, eds. The Wealth of the Commons:
A World Beyond Market and State. Amherst, MA: Levellers Press, 2012.
- Botsman, Rachel, and Roo Rogers. What’s Mine Is Yours: The Rise of
+ Botsman, Rachel, and Roo Rogers. Whatâs Mine Is Yours: The Rise of
Collaborative Consumption. New York: Harper Business, 2010.
Boyle, James. The Public Domain: Enclosing the Commons of the Mind.
@@ -7964,7 +7964,7 @@
Chesbrough, Henry. Open Business Models: How to Thrive in the New
Innovation Landscape. Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 2006.
- ———. Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting
+ âââ. Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting
from Technology. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press, 2006.
City of Bologna. Regulation on Collaboration between Citizens and
@@ -7973,19 +7973,19 @@
Italy: City of Bologna, 2014).
http://www.labgov.it/wp-content/uploads/sites/9/Bologna-Regulation-on-collaboration-between-citizens-and-the-city-for-the-cure-and-regeneration-of-urban-commons1.pdf.
- Cole, Daniel H. “Learning from Lin: Lessons and Cautions from
- the Natural Commons for the Knowledge Commons.” Chap. 2 in
+ Cole, Daniel H. âLearning from Lin: Lessons and Cautions from
+ the Natural Commons for the Knowledge Commons.â Chap. 2 in
Frischmann, Madison, and Strandburg, Governing Knowledge Commons.
Creative Commons. 2015 State of the Commons. Mountain View, CA:
Creative Commons, 2015.
http://stateof.creativecommons.org/2015/.
- Doctorow, Cory. Information Doesn’t Want to Be Free: Laws for the
- Internet Age. San Francisco: McSweeney’s, 2014.
+ Doctorow, Cory. Information Doesnât Want to Be Free: Laws for the
+ Internet Age. San Francisco: McSweeneyâs, 2014.
- Eckhardt, Giana, and Fleura Bardhi. “The Sharing Economy Isn’t
- about Sharing at All.” Harvard Business Review, January 28,
+ Eckhardt, Giana, and Fleura Bardhi. âThe Sharing Economy Isnât
+ about Sharing at All.â Harvard Business Review, January 28,
2015.
http://hbr.org/2015/01/the-sharing-economy-isnt-about-sharing-at-all.
@@ -7998,12 +7998,12 @@
Eyal, Nir. Hooked: How to Build Habit-Forming Products. With Ryan
Hoover. New York: Portfolio, 2014.
- Farley, Joshua, and Ida Kubiszewski. “The Economics of
- Information in a Post-Carbon Economy.” Chap. 11 in Elliott
+ Farley, Joshua, and Ida Kubiszewski. âThe Economics of
+ Information in a Post-Carbon Economy.â Chap. 11 in Elliott
and Hepting, Free Knowledge.
Foster, William Landes, Peter Kim, and Barbara Christiansen.
- “Ten Nonprofit Funding Models.” Stanford Social
+ âTen Nonprofit Funding Models.â Stanford Social
Innovation Review, Spring 2009.
http://ssir.org/articles/entry/ten_nonprofit_funding_models.
@@ -8015,7 +8015,7 @@
University Press, 2014.
Frischmann, Brett M., Michael J. Madison, and Katherine J.
- Strandburg. “Governing Knowledge Commons.” Chap. 1 in
+ Strandburg. âGoverning Knowledge Commons.â Chap. 1 in
Frischmann, Madison, and Strandburg, Governing Knowledge Commons.
Gansky, Lisa. The Mesh: Why the Future of Business Is Sharing.
@@ -8037,7 +8037,7 @@
Hyde, Lewis. Common as Air: Revolution, Art, and Ownership. New
York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2010.
- ———. The Gift: Creativity and the Artist in the Modern World. 2nd
+ âââ. The Gift: Creativity and the Artist in the Modern World. 2nd
Vintage Books edition. New York: Vintage Books, 2007.
Kelley, Tom, and David Kelley. Creative Confidence: Unleashing the
@@ -8050,14 +8050,14 @@
Kleon, Austin. Show Your Work: 10 Ways to Share Your Creativity and
Get Discovered. New York: Workman, 2014.
- ———. Steal Like an Artist: 10 Things Nobody Told You about Being
+ âââ. Steal Like an Artist: 10 Things Nobody Told You about Being
Creative. New York: Workman, 2012.
Kramer, Bryan. Shareology: How Sharing Is Powering the Human
Economy. New York: Morgan James, 2016.
- Lee, David. “Inside Medium: An Attempt to Bring Civility to
- the Internet.” BBC News, March 3, 2016.
+ Lee, David. âInside Medium: An Attempt to Bring Civility to
+ the Internet.â BBC News, March 3, 2016.
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-35709680
Lessig, Lawrence. Remix: Making Art and Commerce Thrive in the
@@ -8094,17 +8094,17 @@
http://pro.europeana.eu/publication/democratising-the-rijksmuseum
(licensed under CC BY-SA).
- Ramos, José Maria, ed. The City as Commons: A Policy Reader.
+ Ramos, José Maria, ed. The City as Commons: A Policy Reader.
Melbourne, Australia: Commons Transition Coalition, 2016.
http://www.academia.edu/27143172/The_City_as_Commons_a_Policy_Reader
(licensed under CC BY-NC-ND).
Raymond, Eric S. The Cathedral and the Bazaar: Musings on Linux and
- Open Source by an Accidental Revolutionary. Rev. ed. Sebastopol, CA:
- O’Reilly Media, 2001. See esp. “The Magic Cauldron.”
+ Open Source by an Accidental Revolutionary. Rev. ed. Sebastopol, CA:
+ OâReilly Media, 2001. See esp. âThe Magic Cauldron.â
http://www.catb.org/esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/.
- Ries, Eric. The Lean Startup: How Today’s Entrepreneurs Use
+ Ries, Eric. The Lean Startup: How Todayâs Entrepreneurs Use
Continuous Innovation to Create Radically Successful Businesses. New
York: Crown Business, 2011.
@@ -8118,13 +8118,13 @@
Rushkoff, Douglas. Throwing Rocks at the Google Bus: How Growth
Became the Enemy of Prosperity. New York: Portfolio, 2016.
- Sandel, Michael J. What Money Can’t Buy: The Moral Limits of
+ Sandel, Michael J. What Money Canât Buy: The Moral Limits of
Markets. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2012.
Shirky, Clay. Cognitive Surplus: How Technology Makes Consumers into
Collaborators. London, England: Penguin Books, 2010.
- Slee, Tom. What’s Yours Is Mine: Against the Sharing Economy. New
+ Slee, Tom. Whatâs Yours Is Mine: Against the Sharing Economy. New
York: OR Books, 2015.
Stephany, Alex. The Business of Sharing: Making in the New Sharing
@@ -8213,10 +8213,10 @@
MacEwan, Harry Kaczka, Humble Daisy, Ian Capstick, Iris Brest, James
Cloos, Jamie Stevens, Jamil Khatib, Jane Finette, Jason Blasso,
Jason E. Barkeloo, Jay M Williams, Jean-Philippe Turcotte, Jeanette
- Frey, Jeff De Cagna, Jérôme Mizeret, Jessica Dickinson Goodman,
- Jessy Kate Schingler, Jim O’Flaherty, Jim Pellegrini, Jiří Marek, Jo
+ Frey, Jeff De Cagna, Jérôme Mizeret, Jessica Dickinson Goodman,
+ Jessy Kate Schingler, Jim OâFlaherty, Jim Pellegrini, JiÅÃ Marek, Jo
Allum, Joachim von Goetz, Johan Adda, John Benfield, John Bevan,
- Jonas Öberg, Jonathan Lin, JP Rangaswami, Juan Carlos Belair, Justin
+ Jonas Ãberg, Jonathan Lin, JP Rangaswami, Juan Carlos Belair, Justin
Christian, Justin Szlasa, Kate Chapman, Kate Stewart, Kellie
Higginbottom, Kendra Byrne, Kevin Coates, Kristina Popova,
Kristoffer Steen, Kyle Simpson, Laurie Racine, Leonardo Bueno
@@ -8224,12 +8224,12 @@
Benyayer, Maik Schmalstich, Mairi Thomson, Marcia Hofmann, Maria
Liberman, Marino Hernandez, Mario R. Hemsley, MD, Mark Cohen, Mark
Mullen, Mary Ellen Davis, Mathias Bavay, Matt Black, Matt Hall, Max
- van Balgooy, Médéric Droz-dit-Busset, Melissa Aho, Menachem
+ van Balgooy, Médéric Droz-dit-Busset, Melissa Aho, Menachem
Goldstein, Michael Harries, Michael Lewis, Michael Weiss, Miha
Batic, Mike Stop Continues, Mike Stringer, Mustafa K Calik, MD, Neal
Stimler, Niall McDonagh, Niall Twohig, Nicholas Norfolk, Nick
Coghlan, Nicole Hickman, Nikki Thompson, Norrie Mailer, Omar
- Kaminski, OpenBuilds, Papp István Péter, Pat Sticks, Patricia
+ Kaminski, OpenBuilds, Papp István Péter, Pat Sticks, Patricia
Brennan, Paul and Iris Brest, Paul Elosegui, Penny Pearson, Peter
Mengelers, Playground Inc., Pomax, Rafaela Kunz, Rajiv Jhangiani,
Rayna Stamboliyska, Rob Berkley, Rob Bertholf, Robert Jones, Robert
@@ -8238,7 +8238,7 @@
Scott Gillespie, Seb Schmoller, Sharon Clapp, Sheona Thomson, Siena
Oristaglio, Simon Law, Solomon Simon, Stefano Guidotti, Subhendu
Ghosh, Susan Chun, Suzie Wiley, Sylvain Carle, Theresa Bernardo,
- Thomas Hartman, Thomas Kent, Timothée Planté, Timothy Hinchliff,
+ Thomas Hartman, Thomas Kent, Timothée Planté, Timothy Hinchliff,
Traci Long DeForge, Trevor Hogue, Tumuult, Vickie Goode, Vikas Shah,
Virginia Kopelman, Wayne Mackintosh, William Peter Nash, Winie
Evers, Wolfgang Renninger, Xavier Antoviaque, Yancey Strickler
@@ -8249,7 +8249,7 @@
Morris, Adam Procter, Adam Quirk, Adam Rory Porter, Adam Simmons,
Adam Tinworth, Adam Zimmerman, Adrian Ho, Adrian Smith, Adriane
Ruzak, Adriano Loconte, Al Sweigart, Alain Imbaud, Alan Graham, Alan
- M. Ford, Alan Swithenbank, Alan Vonlanthen, Albert O’Connor, Alec
+ M. Ford, Alan Swithenbank, Alan Vonlanthen, Albert OâConnor, Alec
Foster, Alejandro Suarez Cebrian, Aleks Degtyarev, Alex Blood, Alex
C. Ion, Alex Ross Shaw, Alexander Bartl, Alexander Brown, Alexander
Brunner, Alexander Eliesen, Alexander Hawson, Alexander Klar,
@@ -8258,17 +8258,17 @@
Louro, Ali Sternburg, Alicia Gibb & Lunchbox Electronics, Alison
Link, Alison Pentecost, Alistair Boettiger, Alistair Walder, Alix
Bernier, Allan Callaghan, Allen Riddell, Allison Breland Crotwell,
- Allison Jane Smith, Álvaro Justen, Amanda Palmer, Amanda Wetherhold,
+ Allison Jane Smith, Ãlvaro Justen, Amanda Palmer, Amanda Wetherhold,
Amit Bagree, Amit Tikare, Amos Blanton, Amy Sept, Anatoly Volynets,
- Anders Ericsson, Andi Popp, André Bose Do Amaral, Andre Dickson,
- André Koot, André Ricardo, Andre van Rooyen, Andre Wallace, Andrea
+ Anders Ericsson, Andi Popp, André Bose Do Amaral, Andre Dickson,
+ André Koot, André Ricardo, Andre van Rooyen, Andre Wallace, Andrea
Bagnacani, Andrea Pepe, Andrea Pigato, Andreas Jagelund, Andres
Gomez Casanova, Andrew A. Farke, Andrew Berhow, Andrew Hearse,
Andrew Matangi, Andrew R McHugh, Andrew Tam, Andrew Turvey, Andrew
Walsh, Andrew Wilson, Andrey Novoseltsev, Andy McGhee, Andy Reeve,
Andy Woods, Angela Brett, Angeliki Kapoglou, Angus Keenan,
Anne-Marie Scott, Antero Garcia, Antoine Authier, Antoine Michard,
- Anton Kurkin, Anton Porsche, Antònia Folguera, António Ornelas,
+ Anton Kurkin, Anton Porsche, Antònia Folguera, António Ornelas,
Antonis Triantafyllakis, aois21 publishing, April Johnson, Aria F.
Chernik, Ariane Allan, Ariel Katz, Arithmomaniac, Arnaud Tessier,
Arnim Sommer, Ashima Bawa, Ashley Elsdon, Athanassios Diacakis,
@@ -8278,16 +8278,16 @@
Hougaard, Ben Chad, Ben Doherty, Ben Hansen, Ben Nuttall, Ben
Rosenthal, Ben Sheridan, Benedikt Foit, Benita Tsao, Benjamin
Costantini, Benjamin Daemon, Benjamin Keele, Benjamin Pflanz,
- Berglind Ósk Bergsdóttir, Bernardo Miguel Antunes, Bernd Nurnberger,
+ Berglind Ãsk Bergsdóttir, Bernardo Miguel Antunes, Bernd Nurnberger,
Bernhard Seefeld, Beth Gis, Beth Tillinghast, Bethanye Blount, Bill
Bonwitt, Bill Browne, Bill Keaggy, Bill Maiden, Bill Rafferty, Bill
Scanlon, Bill Shields, Bill Slankard, BJ Becker, Bjorn
- Freeman-Benson, Bjørn Otto Wallevik, BK Bitner, Bo Ilsøe Hansen, Bo
+ Freeman-Benson, Bjørn Otto Wallevik, BK Bitner, Bo Ilsøe Hansen, Bo
Sprotte Kofod, Bob Doran, Bob Recny, Bob Stuart, Bonnie Chiu, Boris
Mindzak, Boriss Lariushin, Borjan Tchakaloff, Brad Kik, Braden
- Hassett, Bradford Benn, Bradley Keyes, Bradley L’Herrou, Brady
+ Hassett, Bradford Benn, Bradley Keyes, Bradley LâHerrou, Brady
Forrest, Brandon McGaha, Branka Tokic, Brant Anderson, Brenda
- Sullivan, Brendan O’Brien, Brendan Schlagel, Brett Abbott, Brett
+ Sullivan, Brendan OâBrien, Brendan Schlagel, Brett Abbott, Brett
Gaylor, Brian Dysart, Brian Lampl, Brian Lipscomb, Brian S. Weis,
Brian Schrader, Brian Walsh, Brian Walsh, Brooke Dukes, Brooke
Schreier Ganz, Bruce Lerner, Bruce Wilson, Bruno Boutot, Bruno
@@ -8316,9 +8316,9 @@
Christos Keramitsis, Chuck Roslof, Chutika Udomsinn, Claire Wardle,
Clare Forrest, Claudia Cristiani, Claudio Gallo, Claudio Ruiz,
Clayton Dewey, Clement Delort, Cliff Church, Clint Lalonde, Clint
- O’Connor, Cody Allard, Cody Taylor, Colin Ayer, Colin Campbell,
+ OâConnor, Cody Allard, Cody Taylor, Colin Ayer, Colin Campbell,
Colin Dean, Colin Mutchler, Colleen Cressman, Comfy Nomad, Connie
- Roberts, Connor Bär, Connor Merkley, Constantin Graf, Corbett Messa,
+ Roberts, Connor Bär, Connor Merkley, Constantin Graf, Corbett Messa,
Cory Chapman, Cosmic Wombat Games, Craig Engler, Craig Heath, Craig
Maloney, Craig Thomler, Creative Commons Uruguay, Crina Kienle,
Cristiano Gozzini, Curt McNamara, D C Petty, D. Moonfire, D. Rohhyn,
@@ -8344,8 +8344,8 @@
Broadcast, Dom jurkewitz, Dom Lane, Domi Enders, Domingo Gallardo,
Dominic de Haas, Dominique Karadjian, Dongpo Deng, Donnovan Knight,
Door de Flines, Doug Fitzpatrick, Doug Hoover, Douglas Craver,
- Douglas Van Camp, Douglas Van Houweling, Dr. Braddlee, Drew Spencer,
- Duncan Sample, Durand D’souza, Dylan Field, E C Humphries, Eamon
+ Douglas Van Camp, Douglas Van Houweling, Dr. Braddlee, Drew Spencer,
+ Duncan Sample, Durand Dâsouza, Dylan Field, E C Humphries, Eamon
Caddigan, Earleen Smith, Eden Sarid, Eden Spodek, Eduardo Belinchon,
Eduardo Castro, Edwin Vandam, Einar Joergensen, Ejnar Brendsdal,
Elad Wieder, Elar Haljas, Elena Valhalla, Eli Doran, Elias Bouchi,
@@ -8355,17 +8355,17 @@
Celeste, Eric Finkenbiner, Eric Hellman, Eric Steuer, Erica
Fletcher, Erik Hedman, Erik Lindholm Bundgaard, Erika Reid, Erin
Hawley, Erin McKean of Wordnik, Ernest Risner, Erwan Bousse, Erwin
- Bell, Ethan Celery, Étienne Gilli, Eugeen Sablin, Evan Tangman,
+ Bell, Ethan Celery, Ãtienne Gilli, Eugeen Sablin, Evan Tangman,
Evonne Okafor, Evtim Papushev, Fabien Cambi, Fabio Natali, Fauxton
Software, Felix Deierlein, Felix Gebauer, Felix Maximiliano Obes,
Felix Schmidt, Felix Zephyr Hsiao, Ferdies Food Lab, Fernand
Deschambault, Filipe Rodrigues, Filippo Toso, Fiona MacAlister,
- fiona.mac.uk, Floor Scheffer, Florent Darrault, Florian Hähnel,
+ fiona.mac.uk, Floor Scheffer, Florent Darrault, Florian Hähnel,
Florian Schneider, Floyd Wilde, Foxtrot Games, Francis Clarke,
- Francisco Rivas-Portillo, Francois Dechery, Francois Grey, François
- Gros, François Pelletier, Fred Benenson, Frédéric Abella, Frédéric
- Schütz, Fredrik Ekelund, Fumi Yamazaki, Gabor Sooki-Toth, Gabriel
- Staples, Gabriel Véjar Valenzuela, Gal Buki, Gareth Jordan, Garrett
+ Francisco Rivas-Portillo, Francois Dechery, Francois Grey, François
+ Gros, François Pelletier, Fred Benenson, Frédéric Abella, Frédéric
+ Schütz, Fredrik Ekelund, Fumi Yamazaki, Gabor Sooki-Toth, Gabriel
+ Staples, Gabriel Véjar Valenzuela, Gal Buki, Gareth Jordan, Garrett
Heath, Gary Anson, Gary Forster, Gatien de Broucker, Gaurav Kapil,
Gauthier de Valensart, Gavin Gray, Gavin Romig-Koch, Geoff Wood,
Geoffrey Lehr, George Baier IV, George De Bruin, George Lawie,
@@ -8374,21 +8374,21 @@
Moffat, Glenn D. Jones, Glenn Otis Brown, Global Lives Project, Gorm
Lai, Govindarajan Umakanthan, Graham Bird, Graham Freeman, Graham
Heath, Graham Jones, Graham Smith-Gordon, Graham Vowles, Greg
- Brodsky, Greg Malone, Grégoire Detrez, Gregory Chevalley, Gregory
+ Brodsky, Greg Malone, Grégoire Detrez, Gregory Chevalley, Gregory
Flynn, Grit Matthias, Gui Louback, Guillaume Rischard, Gustavo Vaz
- de Carvalho Gonçalves, Gustin Johnson, Gwen Franck, Gwilym Lucas,
- Haggen So, Håkon T Sønderland, Hamid Larbi, Hamish MacEwan, Hannes
+ de Carvalho Gonçalves, Gustin Johnson, Gwen Franck, Gwilym Lucas,
+ Haggen So, Håkon T Sønderland, Hamid Larbi, Hamish MacEwan, Hannes
Leo, Hans Bickhofe, Hans de Raad, Hans Vd Horst, Harold van Ingen,
Harold Watson, Harry Chapman, Harry Kaczka, Harry Torque, Hayden
Glass, Hayley Rosenblum, Heather Leson, Helen Crisp, Helen Michaud,
- Helen Qubain, Helle Rekdal Schønemann, Henrique Flach Latorre
+ Helen Qubain, Helle Rekdal Schønemann, Henrique Flach Latorre
Moreno, Henry Finn, Henry Kaiser, Henry Lahore, Henry Steingieser,
Hermann Paar, Hillary Miller, Hironori Kuriaki, Holly Dykes, Holly
- Lyne, Hubert Gertis, Hugh Geenen, Humble Daisy, Hüppe Keith, Iain
+ Lyne, Hubert Gertis, Hugh Geenen, Humble Daisy, Hüppe Keith, Iain
Davidson, Ian Capstick, Ian Johnson, Ian Upton, Icaro Ferracini,
Igor Lesko, Imran Haider, Inma de la Torre, Iris Brest, Irwin
Madriaga, Isaac Sandaljian, Isaiah Tanenbaum, Ivan F. Villanueva B.,
- J P Cleverdon, Jaakko Tammela Jr, Jacek Darken Gołębiowski, Jack
+ J P Cleverdon, Jaakko Tammela Jr, Jacek Darken GoÅÄbiowski, Jack
Hart, Jacky Hood, Jacob Dante Leffler, Jaime Perla, Jaime Woo, Jake
Campbell, Jake Loeterman, Jakes Rawlinson, James Allenspach, James
Chesky, James Cloos, James Docherty, James Ellars, James K Wood,
@@ -8397,37 +8397,37 @@
Lofton, Jane Mason, Jane Park, Janos Kovacs, Jasmina Bricic, Jason
Blasso, Jason Chu, Jason Cole, Jason E. Barkeloo, Jason Hibbets,
Jason Owen, Jason Sigal, Jay M Williams, Jazzy Bear Brown, JC Lara,
- Jean-Baptiste Carré, Jean-Philippe Dufraigne, Jean-Philippe
+ Jean-Baptiste Carré, Jean-Philippe Dufraigne, Jean-Philippe
Turcotte, Jean-Yves Hemlin, Jeanette Frey, Jeff Atwood, Jeff De
Cagna, Jeff Donoghue, Jeff Edwards, Jeff Hilnbrand, Jeff Lowe, Jeff
Rasalla, Jeff Ski Kinsey, Jeff Smith, Jeffrey L Tucker, Jeffrey
Meyer, Jen Garcia, Jens Erat, Jeppe Bager Skjerning, Jeremy Dudet,
Jeremy Russell, Jeremy Sabo, Jeremy Zauder, Jerko Grubisic, Jerome
- Glacken, Jérôme Mizeret, Jessica Dickinson Goodman, Jessica Litman,
- Jessica Mackay, Jessy Kate Schingler, Jesús Longás Gamarra, Jesus
- Marin, Jim Matt, Jim Meloy, Jim O’Flaherty, Jim Pellegrini, Jim
- Tittsler, Jimmy Alenius, Jiří Marek, Jo Allum, Joachim Brandon
+ Glacken, Jérôme Mizeret, Jessica Dickinson Goodman, Jessica Litman,
+ Jessica Mackay, Jessy Kate Schingler, Jesús Longás Gamarra, Jesus
+ Marin, Jim Matt, Jim Meloy, Jim OâFlaherty, Jim Pellegrini, Jim
+ Tittsler, Jimmy Alenius, JiÅÃ Marek, Jo Allum, Joachim Brandon
LeBlanc, Joachim Pileborg, Joachim von Goetz, Joakim Bang Larsen,
- Joan Rieu, Joanna Penn, João Almeida, Jochen Muetsch, Jodi Sandfort,
+ Joan Rieu, Joanna Penn, João Almeida, Jochen Muetsch, Jodi Sandfort,
Joe Cardillo, Joe Carpita, Joe Moross, Joerg Fricke, Johan Adda,
- Johan Meeusen, Johannes Förstner, Johannes Visintini, John Benfield,
+ Johan Meeusen, Johannes Förstner, Johannes Visintini, John Benfield,
John Bevan, John C Patterson, John Crumrine, John Dimatos, John
Feyler, John Huntsman, John Manoogian III, John Muller, John Ober,
John Paul Blodgett, John Pearce, John Shale, John Sharp, John
Simpson, John Sumser, John Weeks, John Wilbanks, John Worland,
Johnny Mayall, Jollean Matsen, Jon Alberdi, Jon Andersen, Jon Cohrs,
- Jon Gotlin, Jon Schull, Jon Selmer Friborg, Jon Smith, Jonas Öberg,
+ Jon Gotlin, Jon Schull, Jon Selmer Friborg, Jon Smith, Jonas Ãberg,
Jonas Weitzmann, Jonathan Campbell, Jonathan Deamer, Jonathan Holst,
- Jonathan Lin, Jonathan Schmid, Jonathan Yao, Jordon Kalilich, Jörg
- Schwarz, Jose Antonio Gallego Vázquez, Joseph Mcarthur, Joseph Noll,
+ Jonathan Lin, Jonathan Schmid, Jonathan Yao, Jordon Kalilich, Jörg
+ Schwarz, Jose Antonio Gallego Vázquez, Joseph Mcarthur, Joseph Noll,
Joseph Sullivan, Joseph Tucker, Josh Bernhard, Josh Tong, Joshua
Tobkin, JP Rangaswami, Juan Carlos Belair, Juan Irming, Juan Pablo
Carbajal, Juan Pablo Marin Diaz, Judith Newman, Judy Tuan, Jukka
- Hellén, Julia Benson-Slaughter, Julia Devonshire, Julian Fietkau,
+ Hellén, Julia Benson-Slaughter, Julia Devonshire, Julian Fietkau,
Julie Harboe, Julien Brossoit, Julien Leroy, Juliet Chen, Julio
- Terra, Julius Mikkelä, Justin Christian, Justin Grimes, Justin
+ Terra, Julius Mikkelä, Justin Christian, Justin Grimes, Justin
Jones, Justin Szlasa, Justin Walsh, JustinChung.com, K. J.
- Przybylski, Kaloyan Raev, Kamil Śliwowski, Kaniska Padhi, Kara
+ Przybylski, Kaloyan Raev, Kamil Åliwowski, Kaniska Padhi, Kara
Malenfant, Kara Monroe, Karen Pe, Karl Jahn, Karl Jonsson, Karl
Nelson, Kasia Zygmuntowicz, Kat Lim, Kate Chapman, Kate Stewart,
Kathleen Beck, Kathleen Hanrahan, Kathryn Abuzzahab, Kathryn Deiss,
@@ -8437,7 +8437,7 @@
Larsen, Ken Haase, Ken Torbeck, Kendel Ratley, Kendra Byrne, Kerry
Hicks, Kevin Brown, Kevin Coates, Kevin Flynn, Kevin Rumon, Kevin
Shannon, Kevin Taylor, Kevin Tostado, Kewhyun Kelly-Yuoh, Kiane
- l’Azin, Kianosh Pourian, Kiran Kadekoppa, Kit Walsh, Klaus Mickus,
+ lâAzin, Kianosh Pourian, Kiran Kadekoppa, Kit Walsh, Klaus Mickus,
Konrad Rennert, Kris Kasianovitz, Kristian Lundquist, Kristin
Buxton, Kristina Popova, Kristofer Bratt, Kristoffer Steen, Kumar
McMillan, Kurt Whittemore, Kyle Pinches, Kyle Simpson, L Eaton, Lalo
@@ -8457,10 +8457,10 @@
Lopez, Lukas Mathis, Luke Chamberlin, Luke Chesser, Luke Woodbury,
Lulu Tang, Lydia Pintscher, M Alexander Jurkat, Maarten Sander,
Macie J Klosowski, Magnus Adamsson, Magnus Killingberg, Mahmoud
- Abu-Wardeh, Maik Schmalstich, Maiken Håvarstein, Maira Sutton, Mairi
+ Abu-Wardeh, Maik Schmalstich, Maiken HÃ¥varstein, Maira Sutton, Mairi
Thomson, Mandy Wultsch, Manickkavasakam Rajasekar, Marc Bogonovich,
- Marc Harpster, Marc Martí, Marc Olivier Bastien, Marc Stober,
- Marc-André Martin, Marcel de Leeuwe, Marcel Hill, Marcia Hofmann,
+ Marc Harpster, Marc MartÃ, Marc Olivier Bastien, Marc Stober,
+ Marc-André Martin, Marcel de Leeuwe, Marcel Hill, Marcia Hofmann,
Marcin Olender, Marco Massarotto, Marco Montanari, Marco Morales,
Marcos Medionegro, Marcus Bitzl, Marcus Norrgren, Margaret Gary,
Mari Moreshead, Maria Liberman, Marielle Hsu, Marino Hernandez,
@@ -8474,14 +8474,14 @@
Humpolec, Martin Mayr, Martin Peck, Martin Sanchez, Martino Loco,
Martti Remmelgas, Martyn Eggleton, Martyn Lewis, Mary Ellen Davis,
Mary Heacock, Mary Hess, Mary Mi, Masahiro Takagi, Mason Du, Massimo
- V.A. Manzari, Mathias Bavay, Mathias Nicolajsen Kjærgaard, Matias
+ V.A. Manzari, Mathias Bavay, Mathias Nicolajsen Kjærgaard, Matias
Kruk, Matija Nalis, Matt Alcock, Matt Black, Matt Broach, Matt Hall,
Matt Haughey, Matt Lee, Matt Plec, Matt Skoss, Matt Thompson, Matt
Vance, Matt Wagstaff, Matteo Cocco, Matthew Bendert, Matthew
Bergholt, Matthew Darlison, Matthew Epler, Matthew Hawken, Matthew
Heimbecker, Matthew Orstad, Matthew Peterworth, Matthew Sheehy,
Matthew Tucker, Adaptive Handy Apps, LLC, Mattias Axell, Max Green,
- Max Kossatz, Max lupo, Max Temkin, Max van Balgooy, Médéric
+ Max Kossatz, Max lupo, Max Temkin, Max van Balgooy, Médéric
Droz-dit-Busset, Megan Ingle, Megan Wacha, Meghan Finlayson, Melissa
Aho, Melissa Sterry, Melle Funambuline, Menachem Goldstein, Micah
Bridges, Michael Ailberto, Michael Anderson, Michael Andersson
@@ -8491,15 +8491,15 @@
Michael May, Michael Murphy, Michael Murvine, Michael Perkins,
Michael Sauers, Michael St.Onge, Michael Stanford, Michael Stanley,
Michael Underwood, Michael Weiss, Michael Wright, Michael-Andreas
- Kuttner, Michaela Voigt, Michal Rosenn, Michał Szymański, Michel
+ Kuttner, Michaela Voigt, Michal Rosenn, MichaÅ SzymaÅski, Michel
Gallez, Michell Zappa, Michelle Heeyeon You, Miha Batic, Mik
Ishmael, Mikael Andersson, Mike Chelen, Mike Habicher, Mike Maloney,
Mike Masnick, Mike McDaniel, Mike Pouraryan, Mike Sheldon, Mike Stop
- Continues, Mike Stringer, Mike Wittenstein, Mikkel Ovesen, Mikołaj
+ Continues, Mike Stringer, Mike Wittenstein, Mikkel Ovesen, MikoÅaj
Podlaszewski, Millie Gonzalez, Mindi Lovell, Mindy Lin, Mirko
- “Macro” Fichtner, Mitch Featherston, Mitchell Adams,
+ âMacroâ Fichtner, Mitch Featherston, Mitchell Adams,
Molika Oum, Molly Shaffer Van Houweling, Monica Mora, Morgan Loomis,
- Moritz Schubert, Mrs. Paganini, Mushin Schilling, Mustafa K Calik,
+ Moritz Schubert, Mrs. Paganini, Mushin Schilling, Mustafa K Calik,
MD, Myk Pilgrim, Myra Harmer, Nadine Forget-Dubois, Nagle
Industries, LLC, Nah Wee Yang, Natalie Brown, Natalie Freed, Nathan
D Howell, Nathan Massey, Nathan Miller, Neal Gorenflo, Neal
@@ -8511,10 +8511,10 @@
Theunissen, Nigel Robertson, Nikki Thompson, Nikko Marie, Nikola
Chernev, Nils Lavesson, Noah Blumenson-Cook, Noah Fang, Noah
Kardos-Fein, Noah Meyerhans, Noel Hanigan, Noel Hart, Norrie Mailer,
- O.P. Gobée, Ohad Mayblum, Olivia Wilson, Olivier De Doncker, Olivier
+ O.P. Gobée, Ohad Mayblum, Olivia Wilson, Olivier De Doncker, Olivier
Schulbaum, Olle Ahnve, Omar Kaminski, Omar Willey, OpenBuilds, Ove
- Ødegård, Øystein Kjærnet, Pablo López Soriano, Pablo Vasquez,
- Pacific Design, Paige Mackay, Papp István Péter, Paris Marx, Parker
+ ÃdegÃ¥rd, Ãystein Kjærnet, Pablo López Soriano, Pablo Vasquez,
+ Pacific Design, Paige Mackay, Papp István Péter, Paris Marx, Parker
Higgins, Pasquale Borriello, Pat Allan, Pat Hawks, Pat Ludwig, Pat
Sticks, Patricia Brennan, Patricia Rosnel, Patricia Wolf, Patrick
Berry, Patrick Beseda, Patrick Hurley, Patrick M. Lozeau, Patrick
@@ -8522,10 +8522,10 @@
Patrik Kernstock, Patti J Ryan, Paul A Golder, Paul and Iris Brest,
Paul Bailey, Paul Bryan, Paul Bunkham, Paul Elosegui, Paul Hibbitts,
Paul Jacobson, Paul Keller, Paul Rowe, Paul Timpson, Paul Walker,
- Pavel Dostál, Peeter Sällström Randsalu, Peggy Frith, Pen-Yuan
- Hsing, Penny Pearson, Per Åström, Perry Jetter, Péter Fankhauser,
+ Pavel Dostál, Peeter Sällström Randsalu, Peggy Frith, Pen-Yuan
+ Hsing, Penny Pearson, Per Ã
ström, Perry Jetter, Péter Fankhauser,
Peter Hirtle, Peter Humphries, Peter Jenkins, Peter Langmar, Peter
- le Roux, Peter Marinari, Peter Mengelers, Peter O’Brien, Peter
+ le Roux, Peter Marinari, Peter Mengelers, Peter OâBrien, Peter
Pinch, Peter S. Crosby, Peter Wells, Petr Fristedt, Petr Viktorin,
Petronella Jeurissen, Phil Flickinger, Philip Chung, Philip Pangrac,
Philip R. Skaggs Jr., Philip Young, Philippa Lorne Channer, Philippe
@@ -8534,10 +8534,10 @@
Kirill, Print3Dreams Ltd., Quentin Coispeau, R. Smith, Race
DiLoreto, Rachel Mercer, Rafael Scapin, Rafaela Kunz, Rain Doggerel,
Raine Lourie, Rajiv Jhangiani, Ralph Chapoteau, Randall Kirby, Randy
- Brians, Raphaël Alexandre, Raphaël Schröder, Rasmus Jensen, Rayn
+ Brians, Raphaël Alexandre, Raphaël Schröder, Rasmus Jensen, Rayn
Drahps, Rayna Stamboliyska, Rebecca Godar, Rebecca Lendl, Rebecca
Weir, Regina Tschud, Remi Dino, Ric Herrero, Rich McCue, Richard
- “TalkToMeGuy” Olson, Richard Best, Richard Blumberg,
+ âTalkToMeGuyâ Olson, Richard Best, Richard Blumberg,
Richard Fannon, Richard Heying, Richard Karnesky, Richard Kelly,
Richard Littauer, Richard Sobey, Richard White, Richard Winchell,
Rik ToeWater, Rita Lewis, Rita Wood, Riyadh Al Balushi, Rob Balder,
@@ -8547,7 +8547,7 @@
Orzanna, Robert Paterson Hunter, Robert R. Daniel Jr., Robert
Ryan-Silva, Robert Thompson, Robert Wagoner, Roberto Selvaggio,
Robin DeRosa, Robin Rist Kildal, Rodrigo Castilhos, Roger Bacon,
- Roger Saner, Roger So, Roger Solé, Roger Tregear, Roland Tanglao,
+ Roger Saner, Roger So, Roger Solé, Roger Tregear, Roland Tanglao,
Rolf and Mari von Walthausen, Rolf Egstad, Rolf Schaller, Ron
Zuijlen, Ronald Bissell, Ronald van den Hoff, Ronda Snow, Rory
Landon Aronson, Ross Findlay, Ross Pruden, Ross Williams, Rowan
@@ -8557,7 +8557,7 @@
Sasaki, Ryan Singer, Ryan Voisin, Ryan Weir, S Searle, Salem Bin
Kenaid, Salomon Riedo, Sam Hokin, Sam Twidale, Samantha Levin,
Samantha-Jayne Chapman, Samarth Agarwal, Sami Al-AbdRabbuh, Samuel
- A. Rebelsky, Samuel Goëta, Samuel Hauser, Samuel Landete, Samuel
+ A. Rebelsky, Samuel Goëta, Samuel Hauser, Samuel Landete, Samuel
Oliveira Cersosimo, Samuel Tait, Sandra Fauconnier, Sandra Markus,
Sandy Bjar, Sandy ONeil, Sang-Phil Ju, Sanjay Basu, Santiago Garcia,
Sara Armstrong, Sara Lucca, Sara Rodriguez Marin, Sarah Brand, Sarah
@@ -8576,38 +8576,38 @@
Simon Linder, Simon Moffitt, Solomon Kahn, Solomon Simon, Soujanna
Sarkar, Stanislav Trifonov, Stefan Dumont, Stefan Jansson, Stefan
Langer, Stefan Lindblad, Stefano Guidotti, Stefano Luzardi, Stephan
- Meißl, Stéphane Wojewoda, Stephanie Pereira, Stephen Gates, Stephen
+ MeiÃl, Stéphane Wojewoda, Stephanie Pereira, Stephen Gates, Stephen
Murphey, Stephen Pearce, Stephen Rose, Stephen Suen, Stephen Walli,
Stevan Matheson, Steve Battle, Steve Fisches, Steve Fitzhugh, Steve
Guen-gerich, Steve Ingram, Steve Kroy, Steve Midgley, Steve Rhine,
- Steven Kasprzyk, Steven Knudsen, Steven Melvin, Stig-Jørund B. Ö.
+ Steven Kasprzyk, Steven Knudsen, Steven Melvin, Stig-Jørund B. Ã.
Arnesen, Stuart Drewer, Stuart Maxwell, Stuart Reich, Subhendu
- Ghosh, Sujal Shah, Sune Bøegh, Susan Chun, Susan R Grossman, Suzie
+ Ghosh, Sujal Shah, Sune Bøegh, Susan Chun, Susan R Grossman, Suzie
Wiley, Sven Fielitz, Swan/Starts, Sylvain Carle, Sylvain Chery,
Sylvia Green, Sylvia van Bruggen, Szabolcs Berecz, T. L. Mason,
Tanbir Baeg, Tanya Hart, Tara Tiger Brown, Tara Westover, Tarmo
Toikkanen, Tasha Turner Lennhoff, Tathagat Varma, Ted Timmons, Tej
Dhawan, Teresa Gonczy, Terry Hook, Theis Madsen, Theo M. Scholl,
Theresa Bernardo, Thibault Badenas, Thomas Bacig, Thomas Boehnlein,
- Thomas Bøvith, Thomas Chang, Thomas Hartman, Thomas Kent, Thomas
+ Thomas Bøvith, Thomas Chang, Thomas Hartman, Thomas Kent, Thomas
Morgan, Thomas Philipp-Edmonds, Thomas Thrush, Thomas Werkmeister,
Tieg Zaharia, Tieu Thuy Nguyen, Tim Chambers, Tim Cook, Tim Evers,
- Tim Nichols, Tim Stahmer, Timothée Planté, Timothy Arfsten, Timothy
- Hinchliff, Timothy Vollmer, Tina Coffman, Tisza Gergő, Tobias
+ Tim Nichols, Tim Stahmer, Timothée Planté, Timothy Arfsten, Timothy
+ Hinchliff, Timothy Vollmer, Tina Coffman, Tisza GergÅ, Tobias
Schonwetter, Todd Brown, Todd Pousley, Todd Sattersten, Tom Bamford,
Tom Caswell, Tom Goren, Tom Kent, Tom MacWright, Tom Maillioux, Tom
Merkli, Tom Merritt, Tom Myers, Tom Olijhoek, Tom Rubin, Tommaso De
Benetti, Tommy Dahlen, Tony Ciak, Tony Nwachukwu, Torsten Skomp,
Tracey Depellegrin, Tracey Henton, Tracey James, Traci Long DeForge,
Trent Yarwood, Trevor Hogue, Trey Blalock, Trey Hunner, Tryggvi
- Björgvinsson, Tumuult, Tushar Roy, Tyler Occhiogrosso, Udo
+ Björgvinsson, Tumuult, Tushar Roy, Tyler Occhiogrosso, Udo
Blenkhorn, Uri Sivan, Vanja Bobas, Vantharith Oum, Vaughan jenkins,
Veethika Mishra, Vic King, Vickie Goode, Victor DePina, Victor
Grigas, Victoria Klassen, Victorien Elvinger, VIGA Manufacture,
- Vikas Shah, Vinayak S.Kaujalgi, Vincent O’Leary, Violette Paquet,
+ Vikas Shah, Vinayak S.Kaujalgi, Vincent OâLeary, Violette Paquet,
Virginia Gentilini, Virginia Kopelman, Vitor Menezes, Vivian
Marthell, Wayne Mackintosh, Wendy Keenan, Werner Wiethege, Wesley
- Derbyshire, Widar Hellwig, Willa Köerner, William Bettridge-Radford,
+ Derbyshire, Widar Hellwig, Willa Köerner, William Bettridge-Radford,
William Jefferson, William Marshall, William Peter Nash, William
Ray, William Robins, Willow Rosenberg, Winie Evers, Wolfgang
Renninger, Xavier Antoviaque, Xavier Hugonet, Xavier Moisant, Xueqi
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
