"In the environmental world, Hardin’s "Tragedy of the #commons" is, if anything, more urgent after 50 years. But the enclosure of the commons of the mind (#digitalcommons) has showed the limits of the argument.
As his article heads into its 2nd half-century, it would be nice to think that we could learn to see the comedies of the intangible commons as clearly as he saw the tragedy of the terrestrial one."
James Boyle on the 50th anniversary of "The tragedy of the commons"
https://www.economist.com/open-future/2018/12/12/the-fight-to-keep-ideas-open-to-all
@josemurilo Wow, this (see highlighted paragraph in attached screenshot) is factually incorrect. The quoted expert is conflating “open source” with share alike licenses like GPL. And Google can (and has) enclosed Android by extending it using Google Play Services.
@aral Oops! I think Boyle would like to see your comment. That could be a good conversation.
@ng0 @aral I should say that Boyle is no 'random law professor'. I've been following the guy from the 90s, and his 'Environmentalism for the Net' (1997 - https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/dlj/vol47/iss1/2/) was the inspiration for my original 'Ecologia Digital' blog in 2002.
But the environment has changed, and Aral has the ability to sagaciously update some key perspectives. This is an important conversation to have right now.
@josemurilo I agree with @aral about the fact that the author confused things. #FreeSoftware (consider only the 4 freedoms of the functional data, to simplify) == #copyleft + lax license + protection against #DigitalHandcuffs ( #DRM, #RestrictedBoot, etc) - community oriented #copyleft enforcement. #OpenSource (-1/-2 freedoms) == #FreeSoftware - protection against #DigitalHandcuffs - community oriented #copyleft enforcement.