Free content - Wikipedia

Free content - Wikipedia
Jump to content
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Free licensed works in any field
For understanding how free content works on Wikipedia, see
Wikipedia:Free content
"Free use" redirects here. For the fetish, see
Sexual objectification § Free use
The logo on the computer screen is a Creative Commons license, while the paper explains (in
Khmer
) that the image is open content.
Free content
libre content
libre information
, or
free information
is any kind of
creative work
such as a
work of art
, a
book
software program
or any other creative
content
for which there are very minimal
and other legal limitations on usage, modification and distribution. These are works or expressions which can be freely studied, applied, copied and modified by anyone for any purpose.
Often this includes commercial purposes, as explicitly required by some definitions of free content
and implied by others
citation needed
. Free content encompasses all works in the
public domain
and also those copyrighted works whose
licenses
honor and uphold the definition of free cultural work.
In most countries, the
Berne Convention
grants copyright holders control over their creations by default.
Therefore, copyrighted content must be explicitly declared free by the authors, which is usually accomplished by referencing or including licensing statements from within the work.
10
The right to reuse such a work is granted by the authors in a license known as a
free license
, a free distribution license, or an open license, depending on the rights assigned.
10
These freedoms given to users in the reuse of works (that is, the right to freely use, study, modify or distribute these works, possibly also for commercial purposes) are often associated with obligations (to cite the original author, to maintain the original license of the reused content) or restrictions (excluding commercial use, banning certain media) chosen by the author.
11
There are a number of standardized licenses offering varied options that allow authors to choose the type of reuse of their work that they wish to authorize or forbid.
12
Definition
There are a number of different definitions of free content in regular use. Legally, however, free content is very similar to
open content
. An analogy is a use of the rival terms free software and open-source, which describe ideological differences rather than legal ones.
13
14
The term Open Source, by contrast, sought to encompass them all in one movement.
15
16
For instance, the
Open Knowledge Foundation
's
Open Definition
describes "open" as synonymous with the definition of
free
in the "Definition of Free Cultural Works" (as also in the
Open Source Definition
and
Free Software Definition
).
For such free/open content both movements recommend the same three
Creative Commons licenses
, the CC BY, CC BY-SA, and CC0.
17
18
19
20
Legal background
Main article:
Copyright symbol
Copyright is a legal concept, which gives the author or creator of a work legal control over the
duplication
and public performance of their work.
21
In many jurisdictions, this is limited by a time period after which the works then enter the
public domain
22
Copyright laws are a balance between the rights of creators of intellectual and artistic works and the rights of others to build upon those works.
21
During the time period of copyright the author's work may only be copied, modified, or publicly performed with the consent of the author, unless the use is a
fair use
23
Traditional copyright control limits the use of the work of the author to those who either pay royalties to the author for usage of the author's content or limit their use to fair use. Secondly, it limits the use of content whose author cannot be found.
24
Finally, it creates a perceived barrier between authors by limiting derivative works, such as
mashups
and collaborative content.
25
Although open content has been described as a counterbalance to
, open content licenses rely on a copyright holder's power to license their work, as
copyleft
which also utilizes copyright for such a purpose.
26
Public domain
Main article:
Public domain
Public domain symbol
The public domain is a range of creative works whose
has expired or was never established, as well as ideas and facts
note 1
which are ineligible for copyright. A public domain work is a work whose author has either relinquished to the public or no longer can claim control over, the distribution and usage of the work. As such, any person may manipulate, distribute, or otherwise use the work, without legal ramifications. A work in the public domain or released under a
permissive license
may be referred to as "copycenter".
27
Copyleft
Main article:
Copyleft
Copyleft symbol
Copyleft
is a play on the word
and describes the practice of using copyright law to remove restrictions on distributing copies and modified versions of a work.
28
The aim of copyleft is to use the legal framework of copyright to enable non-author parties to be able to reuse and, in many licensing schemes, modify content that is created by an author. Unlike works in the public domain, the author still maintains copyright over the material, however, the author has granted a non-exclusive license to any person to distribute, and often modify, the work. Copyleft licenses require that any
derivative works
be distributed under the same terms and that the original copyright notices be maintained. A symbol commonly associated with copyleft is a reversal of the
copyright symbol
, facing the other way; the opening of the C points left rather than right. Unlike the copyright symbol, the copyleft symbol does not have a codified meaning.
29
Usage
Projects that provide free content exist in several areas of interest, such as software, academic literature, general literature, music, images, video, and
engineering
. Technology has reduced the cost of publication and reduced the entry barrier sufficiently to allow for the production of widely disseminated materials by individuals or small groups. Projects to provide free literature and multimedia content have become increasingly prominent owing to the ease of dissemination of materials that are associated with the development of computer technology. Such dissemination may have been too costly prior to these technological developments.
Media
Creative Commons logo
In media, which includes textual, audio, and visual content, free licensing schemes such as some of the licenses made by
Creative Commons
have allowed for the dissemination of works under a clear set of legal permissions.
30
Not all Creative Commons licenses are entirely free; their permissions may range from very liberal general redistribution and modification of the work to a more restrictive redistribution-only licensing. Since February 2008, Creative Commons licenses which are entirely free carry a badge indicating that they are "approved for free cultural works".
31
Repositories
exist which exclusively feature free material and provide content such as photographs,
clip art
, music,
32
literature
33
and news articles.
30
While extensive reuse of free content from one website in another website is legal, it is usually not sensible because of the
duplicate content
problem.
Wikipedia
is amongst the most well-known databases of user-uploaded free content on the web. While the vast majority of content on Wikipedia is free content, some copyrighted material is hosted under
fair-use criteria
Software
Main article:
Free and open-source software
OSI logo
Free and open-source software
, which is often referred to as
open source software
and
free software
, is a maturing technology with companies using them to provide services and technology to both end-users and technical consumers. The ease of dissemination increases modularity, which allows for smaller groups to contribute to projects as well as simplifying collaboration. Some claim that open source development models offer similar peer-recognition and collaborative benefit incentive as in more classical fields such as scientific research, with the social structures that result leading to decreased production costs.
34
Free Software Foundation
logo
Given sufficient interest in a software component, by using
peer-to-peer
distribution methods, distribution costs may be reduced, easing the burden of infrastructure maintenance on developers. As distribution is simultaneously provided by consumers, these software distribution models are scalable; that is, the method is feasible regardless of the number of consumers. In some cases, free software vendors may use peer-to-peer technology as a method of dissemination.
35
Project hosting and code distribution is not a problem for most free projects as
a number of providers
offer these services free of charge.
Engineering and technology
Main articles:
Open-source hardware
and
Open-design movement
Logo of the
Open Source Hardware Association
Free content principles have been translated into fields such as engineering, where designs and engineering knowledge can be readily shared and duplicated, in order to reduce overheads associated with project development.
Open design
principles can be applied in engineering and technological applications, with projects in
mobile telephony
, small-scale manufacture,
36
the automotive industry,
37
38
and even agricultural areas. Technologies such as distributed manufacturing can allow
computer-aided manufacturing
and
computer-aided design
techniques to be able to develop small-scale production of components for the development of new, or repair of existing, devices. Rapid fabrication technologies underpin these developments, which allow end-users of technology to be able to construct devices from pre-existing blueprints, using software and manufacturing hardware to convert information into physical objects.
Academia
Main article:
Open access
In academic work, the majority of works are not free, although the percentage of works that are open access is growing.
Open access
refers to online
research
outputs that are free of all restrictions to access and free of many restrictions on use (e.g. certain copyright and license restrictions).
39
Authors may see open access publishing as a way of expanding the audience that is able to access their work to allow for greater impact, or support it for ideological reasons.
40
41
Open access publishers such as
PLOS
and
BioMed Central
provide capacity for review and publishing of free works; such publications are currently more common in science than humanities. Various funding institutions and governing research bodies have
mandated
that academics must produce their works to be open-access, in order to qualify for funding, such as the US
National Institutes of Health
Research Councils UK
(effective 2016) and the
European Union
(effective 2020).
42
43
44
Open access symbol, originally designed by
PLOS
At an institutional level, some universities, such as the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
, have adopted open access publishing by default by introducing their own mandates.
45
Some mandates may permit delayed publication and may charge researchers for open access publishing.
46
47
For teaching purposes, some universities, including
MIT
, provide freely available course content, such as lecture notes, video resources and tutorials. This content is distributed via Internet to the general public. Publication of such resources may be either by a formal institution-wide program,
48
or informally, by individual academics or departments.
Open content
publication has been seen as a method of reducing costs associated with information retrieval in research, as universities typically pay to subscribe for access to content that is published through traditional means.
20
49
Subscriptions for non-free content journals may be expensive for universities to purchase, though the articles are written and peer-reviewed by academics themselves at no cost to the publisher. This has led to disputes between publishers and some universities over subscription costs, such as the one that occurred between the
University of California and the Nature Publishing Group
50
51
Education
Unesco's
Open Educational Resources logo
Main articles:
Open educational resources
and
Open textbook
Free and open content has been used to develop alternative routes towards higher education. Open content is a free way of obtaining higher education that is "focused on collective knowledge and the sharing and reuse of learning and scholarly content."
52
There are multiple projects and organizations that promote learning through open content, including
OpenCourseWare
and
Khan Academy
. Some universities, like
MIT
Yale
, and
Tufts
are making their courses freely available on the internet.
53
There are also a number of organizations promoting the creation of openly licensed textbooks such as the
University of Minnesota's
Open Textbook Library,
Connexions
OpenStax College
, the Saylor Academy, Open Textbook Challenge, and
Wikibooks
54
Legislation
This section
does not
cite
any
sources
Please help
improve this section
by
adding citations to reliable sources
. Unsourced material may be challenged and
removed
July 2024
Learn how and when to remove this message
Any country has its own law and legal system, sustained by its legislation, which consists of documents. In a
democratic country
, laws are published as open content, in principle free content; but in general, there are no explicit licenses attributed for the text of each law, so the license must be assumed as an
implied license
. Only a few countries have explicit licenses in their law-documents, as the UK's
Open Government Licence
(a
CC BY
compatible license). In the other countries, the
implied license
comes from its proper rules (general laws and rules about copyright in government works). The automatic protection provided by the
Berne Convention
does not apply to the texts of laws: Article 2.4 excludes the official texts from the automatic protection. It is also possible to "inherit" the license from context. The set of country's law-documents is made available through national repositories. Examples of law-document open repositories:
LexML Brazil
Legislation.gov.uk
, and
N-Lex
. In general, a law-document is offered in more than one (open) official version, but the main one is that published by a
government gazette
. So, law-documents can eventually inherit license expressed by the repository or by the gazette that contains it.
History
This section needs to be
updated
. The reason given is:
The Open Content Project was replaced by Creative Commons over 10 years ago
Please help update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information.
July 2024
Origins and Open Content Project
The
concept
of applying free software licenses to content was introduced by Michael Stutz, who in 1997 wrote the paper "Applying Copyleft to Non-Software Information" for the
GNU Project
55
The term "open content" was coined by
David A. Wiley
in 1998 and evangelized via the
Open Content Project
, describing works licensed under the
Open Content License
(a non-free share-alike license, see 'Free content' below) and other works licensed under similar terms.
56
The website of the
Open Content Project
once defined open content as 'freely available for modification, use and redistribution under a license similar to those used by the open-source / free software community'.
56
However, such a definition would exclude the Open Content License because that license forbids charging for content; a right required by free and open-source software licenses.
citation needed
5Rs definition
Open Content Project logo, 1998
It has since come to describe a broader class of content without conventional copyright restrictions. The
openness
of content can be assessed under the '5Rs Framework' based on the extent to which it can be retained, reused, revised, remixed and redistributed by members of the public without violating copyright law.
57
Unlike free content and content under
open-source licenses
, there is no clear threshold that a work must reach to qualify as 'open content'.
The 5Rs are put forward on the Open Content Project website as a framework for assessing the extent to which content is open:
Retain – the right to make, own, and control copies of the content (e.g., download, duplicate, store, and manage)
Reuse – the right to use the content in a wide range of ways (e.g., in a class, in a study group, on a website, in a video)
Revise – the right to adapt, adjust, modify, or alter the content itself (e.g., translate the content into another language)
Remix – the right to combine the original or revised content with other open content to create something new (e.g., incorporate the content into a mashup)
Redistribute – the right to share copies of the original content, your revisions, or your remixes with others (e.g., give a copy of the content to a friend)
57
This broader definition distinguishes open content from open-source software, since the latter must be available for commercial use by the public. However, it is similar to several definitions for open educational resources, which include resources under noncommercial and verbatim licenses.
58
59
Successor projects
In 2003, David Wiley announced that the Open Content Project had been succeeded by Creative Commons and their licenses; Wiley joined as "Director of Educational Licenses".
60
61
In 2005, the Open Icecat project was launched, in which product information for e-commerce applications was created and published under the Open Content License. It was embraced by the tech sector, which was already quite
open source
minded.
In 2006, a Creative Commons' successor project, the
Definition of Free Cultural Works
, was introduced for free content.
62
It was put forth by
Erik Möller
Richard Stallman
Lawrence Lessig
Benjamin Mako Hill
, Angela Beesley, and others.
63
The
Definition of Free Cultural Works
is used by the
Wikimedia Foundation
64
In 2009, the Attribution and Attribution-ShareAlike Creative Commons licenses were marked as "Approved for Free Cultural Works".
65
Open Knowledge Foundation
Open Knowledge Foundation logo
Another successor project is the
Open Knowledge Foundation
, founded by
Rufus Pollock
in
Cambridge
, in 2004
66
as a global non-profit network to promote and share open content and data.
67
In 2007 the
OKF
gave an
Open Knowledge Definition
for "content such as music, films, books; data be it scientific, historical, geographic or otherwise; government and other administrative information".
68
In October 2014 with version 2.0
Open Works
and
Open Licenses
were defined and "open" is described as synonymous to the definitions of open/free in the Open Source Definition, the Free Software Definition, and the Definition of Free Cultural Works.
69
A distinct difference is the focus given to the public domain,
open access
, and readable
open formats
. OKF recommends six conformant licenses: three of OKN's (Open Data Commons Public Domain Dedication and Licence, Open Data Commons Attribution License, Open Data Commons
Open Database License
) and the
CC BY
CC BY-SA
, and
CC0
Creative Commons licenses.
70
71
72
See also
Free and open-source software portal
Comparison of free and open-source software licenses
Creative Commons license
and
List of free-content licenses
Digital rights
Open source
Free education
Free software movement
Freedom of information
Information wants to be free
Open publishing
Open-source hardware
Project Gutenberg
[Knowledge for free – The Emergence of Open Educational Resources]
. 2007,
ISBN
92-64-03174-X
Explanatory notes
The copyright status of uncreative aggregates of basic data may differ by region—for the US see
Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Service
; for
Australia
, see
Telstra v Desktop Marketing Systems
References
"About CC Licenses"
Creative Commons
. Retrieved
28 May
2025
"What Is the Public Domain?"
Copyrightlaws.com: Copyright courses and education in plain English
. 7 March 2023
. Retrieved
26 May
2025
Opensource.com.
"What is open source? | Opensource.com"
opensource.com
. Retrieved
26 May
2025
"What is open source?"
www.redhat.com
. Retrieved
26 May
2025
Möller, Erik
; et al. (2008).
"Definition of Free Cultural Works"
. 1.1. freedomdefined.org.
Archived
from the original on 18 August 2016
. Retrieved
20 April
2015
"Licenses/NC - Definition of Free Cultural Works"
freedomdefined.org
. Retrieved
19 March
2026
Free Software Foundation
(19 March 2026).
"What is Free Software?"
GNU Operating System
. Retrieved
19 March
2026
{{
cite web
}}
: CS1 maint: url-status (
link
"Library of Congress Free to Use and Reuse | Library of Congress"
Library of Congress, Washington, D.C. 20540 USA
. Retrieved
26 May
2025
"Authorship Collaborative - Berne Convention"
case.edu
. Retrieved
28 May
2025
Ho, Adrian.
"Library Guides: Open Access: Author Rights and Open Licensing"
guides.lib.uchicago.edu
. Retrieved
28 May
2025
"What Is a Free License (or Open License)?"
help.songtrust.com
. Retrieved
26 May
2025
Duke-Mosier, Phoebe.
"Guides: Copyright and Intellectual Property Toolkit: Creative Commons, Copyleft, and Other Licenses"
pitt.libguides.com
. Retrieved
28 May
2025
Stallman, Richard
"Why Open Source misses the point of Free Software"
Free Software Foundation
Archived
from the original on 4 August 2011
. Retrieved
5 August
2016
Guibault, Lucie; Angelopoulos, Christina (2011).
Open Content Licensing: From Theory to Practice
. Amsterdam University Press. p. 111.
ISBN
978-90-8964-307-0
Kelty, Christopher M. (2008).
"The Cultural Significance of Free Software – Two Bits"
(PDF)
. Durham and London:
Duke University
Press. p. 99.
Archived
(PDF)
from the original on 27 August 2008
. Retrieved
5 August
2016
Prior to 1998, Free Software referred either to the Free Software Foundation (and the watchful, micromanaging eye of Stallman) or to one of thousands of different commercial, avocational, or university-research projects, processes, licenses, and ideologies that had a variety of names: sourceware, freeware, shareware, open software, public domain software, and so on
"Goodbye, "free software"; hello, "open source"
. Catb.org.
Archived
from the original on 2 January 2020
. Retrieved
25 October
2012
licenses
Archived
1 March 2016 at the
Wayback Machine
on opendefinition.com
Creative Commons 4.0 BY and BY-SA licenses approved conformant with the Open Definition
Archived
4 March 2016 at the
Wayback Machine
by Timothy Vollmer on creativecommons.org (December 27th, 2013)
Open Definition 2.0 released
Archived
24 June 2016 at the
Wayback Machine
by Timothy Vollmer on creativecommons.org (October 7th, 2014)
"Costs and business models in scientific research publishing: A report commissioned by the Wellcome Trust"
(PDF)
. Archived from
the original
(PDF)
on 19 February 2009
. Retrieved
23 May
2009
"What is Copyright? | U.S. Copyright Office"
www.copyright.gov
. Retrieved
28 May
2025
Kopel, Matthew.
"LibGuides: Copyright Services: Copyright Term and the Public Domain"
guides.library.cornell.edu
. Retrieved
28 May
2025
"Copyright Terms & Definitions"
The Copyright Society
. Retrieved
28 May
2025
"The Importance of Orphan Works Legislation"
Archived
from the original on 5 January 2010
. Retrieved
13 June
2011
Ben Depoorter; Francesco Parisi (2002). "Fair use and copyright protection: a price theory explanation".
International Review of Law and Economics
21
(4): 453.
CiteSeerX
10.1.1.196.423
doi
10.1016/S0144-8188(01)00071-0
ISSN
0144-8188
Liang, Lawrence (2007).
"Free/Open Source Software Open Content"
(PDF)
Asia-Pacific Development Information Programme: e-Primers on Free/Open Source Software
. United Nations Development Programme – Asia-Pacific Development Information Programme.
Archived
(PDF)
from the original on 22 March 2012
. Retrieved
23 June
2012
Raymond, Eric S.
"Copycenter"
. The
Jargon File
Archived
from the original on 16 September 2010
. Retrieved
9 August
2008
Dusollier, S (2003). "Open source and copyleft. Authorship reconsidered?".
Columbia Journal of Law and the Arts
26
(296).
Hall, G. Brent (2008).
Open Source Approaches in Spatial Data Handling
. Springer. p. 29.
Bibcode
2008osas.book.....H
ISBN
978-3-540-74830-4
Archived
from the original on 21 March 2022
. Retrieved
22 March
2009
"What do all the licences mean? Decoding Creative Commons"
Open Newswire
. 1 December 2021
. Retrieved
13 November
2025
Linksvayer, Mike
(20 February 2008).
"Approved for Free Cultural Works"
Creative Commons
Archived
from the original on 17 November 2015
. Retrieved
22 March
2009
"iRate Radio"
SourceForge.net
. Archived from
the original
on 28 February 2009
. Retrieved
22 March
2009
"Gutenberg:No Cost or Freedom?"
Project Gutenberg
. 23 April 2007. Archived from
the original
on 19 November 2008
. Retrieved
22 March
2009
Mustonen, Mikko.
"Copyleft – the economics of Linux and other open-source software"
(PDF)
. Discussion Paper No. 493. Department of Economics,
University of Helsinki
. Archived from
the original
(PDF)
on 24 March 2009
. Retrieved
22 March
2009
Pawlak, Michel; Bryce, Ciarán; Laurière, Stéphane (29 May 2008).
"The Practice of Free and Open Source Software Processes"
(PDF)
Rapport de Recherche
. inria-00274193, version 2.
6519
(April 2008).
ISSN
0249-6399
Archived
(PDF)
from the original on 27 April 2011
. Retrieved
22 March
2009
Hendry, Andrew (4 March 2008).
"RepRap: An open-source 3D printer for the masses"
Computerworld
Australia
The Industry Standard
. Archived from
the original
on 16 May 2008
. Retrieved
22 March
2009
Honsig, Markus (25 January 2006).
"The most open of all cars"
Technology Review
(in German).
Heinz Heise
. Archived from
the original
on 6 April 2009
. Retrieved
22 March
2009
"Australian drive for green commuter cars"
The Sydney Morning Herald
. Sydney. 14 June 2010
. Retrieved
5 June
2015
Suber, Peter.
"Open Access Overview"
Archived
19 May 2007 at the
Wayback Machine
. Earlham.edu. Retrieved on 2011-12-03
Alma Swan; Sheridan Brown (May 2005).
"Open access self-archiving: An author study"
(PDF)
. Key Perspectives Limited. Archived from
the original
(PDF)
on 8 February 2012
. Retrieved
26 July
2010
Andrew, Theo (30 October 2003).
"Trends in Self-Posting of Research Material Online by Academic Staff"
Ariadne
(37).
ISSN
1361-3200
Archived
from the original on 20 November 2010
. Retrieved
22 March
2009
"Policy on Enhancing Public Access to Archived Publications Resulting from NIH-Funded Research"
Archived
from the original on 24 November 2010
. Retrieved
12 July
2009
"Open access - RCUK Policy and revised guidance"
. Archived from
the original
on 21 March 2018
. Retrieved
13 July
2016
"Outcome of Proceedings, 9526/16 RECH 208 TELECOM 100, The transition towards an Open Science System"
Archived
from the original on 5 July 2016
. Retrieved
13 July
2016
"MIT faculty open access to their scholarly articles"
. MIT. 20 March 2009.
Archived
from the original on 30 January 2014
. Retrieved
22 November
2010
"Policy of the Society for General Microbiology towards author self-archiving on PubMed Central and institutional and other repositories"
Archived
from the original on 26 May 2011
. Retrieved
10 April
2009
"OnlineOpen"
. Archived from
the original
on 27 April 2011
. Retrieved
10 April
2009
"About OpenCourseWare"
. Archived from
the original
on 22 April 2009
. Retrieved
10 April
2009
"AMS Journal price survey"
. Archived from
the original
on 28 March 2010
. Retrieved
23 May
2009
"Response from the University of California to the Public statement from Nature Publishing Group regarding subscription renewals at the California Digital Library"
(PDF)
. 10 June 2010. Archived from
the original
(PDF)
on 26 June 2010
. Retrieved
13 September
2015
Hawkes, Nigel (10 November 2003).
"Boycott 'greedy' journal publishers, say scientists"
The Times
. London. Archived from
the original
on 29 April 2011
. Retrieved
13 September
2015
NMC (2012).
"One Year or Less: Open Content"
2010 Horizon Report
. Archived from
the original
on 16 March 2012
. Retrieved
18 April
2012
Admin (2012).
"Open.edu: Top 50 University Open Courseware Collections"
DIY Learning
. Archived from
the original
on 8 October 2017
. Retrieved
18 April
2012
Moxley, Joe (2013).
"Open Textbook Publishing"
. American Association of University Professors
. Retrieved
16 June
2025
Stutz, Michael (1997).
"Applying Copyleft To Non-Software Information"
www.gnu.org
. Free Software Foundation
. Retrieved
20 March
2024
Wiley, David (1998).
"Open Content"
OpenContent.org
. Archived from
the original
on 28 January 1999
. Retrieved
17 April
2012
Wiley, David.
"Open Content"
OpenContent.org
Archived
from the original on 23 June 2012
. Retrieved
18 November
2011
Atkins, Daniel E.; John Seely Brown; Allen L. Hammond (February 2007).
A Review of the Open Educational Resources (OER) Movement: Achievements, Challenges, and New Opportunities
(PDF)
. Menlo Park, CA: The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation. p. 4. Archived from
the original
(PDF)
on 9 March 2012
. Retrieved
3 December
2010
Geser, Guntram (January 2007).
Open Educational Practices and Resources. OLCOS Roadmap 2012
. Salzburg, Austria:
Salzburg Research
, EduMedia Group. p. 20.
Archived
from the original on 4 June 2010
. Retrieved
6 November
2010
OpenContent is officially closed. And that's just fine.
on opencontent.org (30 June 2003, archived)
"Creative Commons Welcomes David Wiley as Educational Use License Project Lead"
creativecommons.org
. 23 June 2003. Archived from
the original
on 6 August 2003.
"Revision history of "Definition" – Definition of Free Cultural Works"
. Freedomdefined.org.
Archived
from the original on 2 November 2012
. Retrieved
14 November
2012
"History – Definition of Free Cultural Works"
. Freedomdefined.org.
Archived
from the original on 30 October 2012
. Retrieved
14 November
2012
"Resolution:Licensing policy"
. Wikimedia Foundation.
Archived
from the original on 13 November 2012
. Retrieved
14 November
2012
"Approved for Free Cultural Works"
. Creative Commons. 24 July 2009.
Archived
from the original on 25 June 2012
. Retrieved
14 November
2012
"Open Knowledge Foundation launched"
Open Knowledge Foundation Weblog
. 24 May 2004.
Archived
from the original on 1 October 2011
. Retrieved
25 October
2015
Davies, Tim (12 April 2014).
"Data, information, knowledge and power – exploring Open Knowledge's new core purpose"
Tim's Blog
Archived
from the original on 29 June 2017
. Retrieved
25 October
2015
version 1.0
on opendefinition.org (archived 2007)
Open Definition 2.1
Archived
27 January 2017 at the
Wayback Machine
on opendefinition.org
licenses
Archived
1 March 2016 at the
Wayback Machine
on opendefintion.com
Creative Commons 4.0 BY and BY-SA licenses approved conformant with the Open Definition
Archived
4 March 2016 at the
Wayback Machine
by Timothy Vollmer on creativecommons.org (27 December 2013)
Open Definition 2.0 released
Archived
4 March 2016 at the
Wayback Machine
by Timothy Vollmer on creativecommons.rog (7 October 2014)
Further reading
D. Atkins; J. S. Brown; A. L. Hammond (February 2007).
A Review of the Open Educational Resources (OER) Movement: Achievements, Challenges, and New Opportunities
(PDF)
. Report to The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD):
Giving Know
Archived
7 July 2017 at the
Wayback Machine
External links
Media related to
Open content
at Wikimedia Commons
Intellectual property
activism
Issues
Artificial scarcity
Censorship by copyright
Copyright infringement
Copyright troll
Digital rights management
Fair use
Fan labor
art
cosplay
fiction
films
games
vidding
Gripe site
Legal aspects of file sharing
Mashup
digital
music
novel
videos
Monopolies of knowledge
Music piracy
Orphan works
Biopiracy
Bioprospecting
Patents
biological
software
software patent debate
trolling
Public domain
Concepts
All rights reversed
Alternative compensation system
Anti-copyright notice
Business models for open-source software
Copyleft
Commercial use of copyleft works
Commons-based peer production
Electronic sell-through
Free content
Free-software license
Libertarian positions
Open content
Open-design movement
Open music model
Open patent
Open source
hardware
software
Prizes instead of patents
contests
Share-alike
Sound recording copyright
Video on demand
Movements
Access to Knowledge movement
Anti-copyright
Cultural environmentalism
Free-culture movement
Free software movement
Organizations
Pro-copyright
Australian Screen Association
Copyright Alliance
Federation Against Copyright Theft
Future of Music Coalition
Motion Picture Association
Recording Industry Association of America
Pro-copyleft
Anna's Archive
Creative Commons
Electronic Frontier Foundation
Free Software Foundation
Library Genesis
Open Rights Group
Organization for Transformative Works
The Anarchist Library
The Pirate Bay
Piratbyrån
Pirate Party
Public Knowledge
Sci-Hub
Shadow library
Students for Free Culture
Z-Library
People
Cory Doctorow
Alexandra Elbakyan
Rick Falkvinge
Lawrence Lessig
Pamela Samuelson
Richard Stallman
Peter Suber
Peter Sunde
Aaron Swartz
Jack Valenti
Documentaries
Good Copy Bad Copy
RiP!: A Remix Manifesto
Steal This Film
The Internet's Own Boy
TPB AFK
Books
Chokepoint Capitalism
Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace
Free Culture
Free culture
and
open content
Concepts and
practices
Key concepts
Commons-based peer production
Crowdsourcing
Freedom of information
Gratis
versus
libre
Open collaboration
Open source
Openness
Participatory culture
Sharism
Research and science
Citizen science
Open science
Access
Notebook science
Research
Science data
Plan S
Data, information,
and knowledge
Free content
Knowledge commons
Open communication
Open knowledge
Content
Data
Communication
and learning
Media
Collaborative writing
Democratic media
Open publishing
Participatory media
Peer review
Education
Open education
educational resources
admissions
open-door policy
List of open universities
Journalism
Citizen media
Citizen journalism
and
Wiki journalism
Open-source journalism
Products
Free and open-source software
(FOSS)
Free/libre software
Open-source software
Open-design movement
Robotics
Open gaming
Open-source architecture
Open-source hardware
Economic principles
Gift economy
Open innovation
Open patent
Open standard
Sharing economy
Politics and governance
Open government
Open-source governance
Freedom of information laws by country
Organizations
Creative Commons
Free Software Foundation
Open Architecture Network
Openmod Initiative
Open Knowledge Foundation
Open Rights Group
Open Source Initiative
Open Web Foundation
Pirate Party
PLOS
SPARC
Activists
Tim Berners-Lee
Alexandra Elbakyan
Lawrence Lessig
Peter Murray-Rust
Douglas Rushkoff
Richard Stallman
Peter Suber
Peter Sunde
Aaron Swartz
John Wilbanks
Projects and
movements
Anna's Archive
DIYbio
Free-culture movement
Free software movement
Library Genesis
Open science movement
Open Source Ecology
Open-source software movement
OpenCores
OpenWetWare
The Anarchist Library
Sci-Hub
Z-Library
Tools
Licenses
Creative Commons
GPL
Definition docs
Free Cultural Works
Free Software
Open
Open Source
Open Data Indices
Open educational resources
Open music model
Open Web movement
Retrieved from "
Categories
Digital art
Free content
Free culture movement
Free and open-source software
Open content
Hidden categories:
CS1 maint: url-status
Webarchive template wayback links
CS1 German-language sources (de)
Articles with short description
Short description is different from Wikidata
Wikipedia indefinitely move-protected pages
Wikipedia semi-protected pages
Use dmy dates from December 2020
All articles with unsourced statements
Articles with unsourced statements from March 2026
Articles needing additional references from July 2024
All articles needing additional references
Wikipedia articles in need of updating from July 2024
All Wikipedia articles in need of updating
Articles with unsourced statements from March 2015
Commons category link from Wikidata
Free content
Add topic