Revision as of 05:42, 3 February 2005 by Emstark (talk | contribs)
Jump to: navigation, search

Open access

What should we do with each of these?

Orphaned works RFC

  • What text should we add to the orphaned works page?
    • Sarah Brown (who just left Public Knowledge) said, "Just instruct people to tell actual stories, things that happened if they can." -- Nelson 23:34, 2 Feb 2005 (EST)
  • How much, or how little, do we want to put on the page in the way of suggestions, what we think people should say, or why it's important to comment?
  • Should we propose an "official" FC.o solution?
    • There is a potential orphaned works project at HLS that we're interested in pursuing. We should chat about this. -- elizabeth

Video project

  • Should we start a mailing list for the video project?
  • Do we have guidelines?
  • What needs to be done?


  • Should we start including the attenance in the minutes?
    • Yes please, it's nice to know who wasn't there so you can update them later if they needed to hear something important. -- Nelson 22:54, 2 Feb 2005 (EST)
  • Should we post agendas to meetings on the wiki before the meeting?
    • Yes, this is great. We can even edit the agenda if something is missing. It beats me and Gavin inventing it all and springing it on people at the meeting. -- Nelson 22:54, 2 Feb 2005 (EST)
    • Should they be on the same page as the minutes, or a different page, so we can compare afterwards?
      • I've always thought that each date should have just one page, with sub-sections. But I don't really care. The agenda and minutes should clearly be kept separate, whether on the same page or two different pages. -- Nelson 22:54, 2 Feb 2005 (EST)
  • No more than one call a week?
    • We currently have too many calls. It's asking too much of FC.o'ers, and we don't gain much by having them all. Your call whether we keep the Sunday or Wednesday call, but they will become more of an invite-only system. -- Gavin
      • yes. 2 calls a week is 1 too many, especially since not that much gets done between calls (especially me anyways. i get most work done just before calls, if any), and friday nights meetings, well, its friday night! =) my vote: sunday calls. -- Ben Li
      • yes. i often have conflicts with wed night calls, but it would be nice not to have sun calls too early! -- elizabeth
      • I, too, like Sunday afternoon. -- Gavin
      • Sunday afternoon seems fine to me. I just worry that if someone misses the one call for the week, they don't have a second call they can make it up on, they have to wait an entire week. Also, what if we get religious people who have church on Sunday and happen to live on the West Coast or something, which would make our conference calls at 11am PST difficult for them. Having multiple calls allows them to still participate if they can't make that one time. -- Nelson 22:54, 2 Feb 2005 (EST)
  • Office hours only when needed?
    • Not as a regular thing. In fact, we're not even convinced that office hours work at all. But we'll only schedule them as needed, and they won't be on Friday nights anymore. -- Gavin


  • Postpone the DRM campaign?
    • We just don't have the resources to take this on this semester. -- Gavin
    • Please excuse my ignorance, but what were we looking to pursue in the DRM campaign? -- elizabeth

Role of FC.o

FC.o should shift from a Web-based, command-and-control model to a chapter-based, participatory model. The role of FC.o should be primarily to facilitate the forming of new chapters, the expansion and improvement of current chapters, and collaboration between chapters. The Core is there to decide how they can help chapters, not to decide what to ask chapters to help with. e.g. If there is a need for it, FC.o should produce educational / propaganda material on X subject; FC.o should not ask or tell chapters to do or participate in a campaign on X subject. Action should come from the chapters and individual members, from the bottom up. This would be a gradual shift, probably extending over the length of the semester or longer. -- Gavin

Core team

  • Exactly what is the Core? What should it be?
  • Who is it? Who should it be?
  • How does it operate? How should it operate?
  • What power do it, and its members, have? What power should they have?


Neeru of CC says

I thought I'd maybe ask you about this. We thought given the nature of the current legal climate, that it would be great to get as much CC licensed music (and other stuff I suppose), on the P2P networks. However, I think this would require a large group of people being involved, sharing and trading stuff on the networks. Already, there's tons of stuff that's licensed and properly tagged at, that you could actually search for within Morpheus.

This seems like it could be a great project for members of the Free Culture Movement. What do you think? We'd love to help organize something.

Nelson says

What do you think? Partnering with CC to put CC stuff on filesharing networks? In a public fashion? This is something we've talked about a lot in the past, as part of the "C3 campaign" but never acted on.

... and just to demonstrate that, yes, Gavin and I did just talk about not doing giant national campaigns, at least for the near future...

Perhaps we can still do national projects that are organized by other organizations, such as Creative Commons. Then we can get national press for local efforts.

E.g. for this CC campaign, we don't make a website or anything, let CC do it. People just put CC songs on their filesharing networks, then tell the press about it, both local and national.

Free media coverage, no standalone site we have to worry about, we just make FC.o look nice and draw attention to our local chapters.

We don't have to say, "alright, troops, everyone get in line and do this!" It can just be a suggestion that people can pick up at their chapters if they want to, and if enough people do, it has the effect of a national campaign anyway.

How about that?

Reblaw Conference

This is a great opportunity to pitch the organization to progressive law students who would potentially be interested in getting involved.

  • I will attempt to spearhead the recruitment efforts. -- elizabeth