Recent announcement by the CBC took me by surprise: the CBC, our national broadcaster who works on taxpayer budget, has declared that due to "pressure from union" it will no longer utilize any open source or Creative Commons licensed material.
But while I wholeheartedly support the intent of the workers, in this case, I find the decision by the CBC to be appalling. For one, the CBC is meant to provide forum for new art forms, serve as an experimental playground for developments in technology or arts. To shut out new forms of potentially superior technologies for the sake of incorporated artists is absurd and short-sighted.
Secondly, the decision would allow the taxpayer-funded broadcaster to ignore a major movement in art and culture, and one composed of a new generation of activists. These are not just any activists or artists - these are artists whose work is expressly political and firmly based in ideas of freedom of exchange and communal development. These political ideals are to be applauded by unions.
Perhaps better expressed by CyberUnion.org (http://ow.ly/31k7V), actions and ideas embodied by Creative Commons and Open Source movements are at the very hart of labour movement.
EDIT: it is realtively unclear as to what/how/and even if the union is actually involved. At best, it is peripheral to the decision in question. The only reference I found mentioning collective agreement and CBC's decision to exclude Creative Commons content is this little tidbit (very questionable) from Spark - http://jasonkoblovsky.blogspot.com/2010/10/cbc-vs-creative-commons-...
My post is not to point any fingers but rather open the question of Creative Commons and Open Source work to debate.
Add a Comment