Openness in Whose Interest?
Maha Bali,
Reflecting Allowed,
Oct 30, 2019
I agree with the general; thrust of Maha Bali's argument here: "Permissions are paternalistic. To focus on openness as permissions is paternalistic." Now Bali places this argument in the context of colonialism. "In the end, in whose interest is there act of being open? it ends up reproducing Western hegemony over knowledge again." I would not that the argument is sound whether or not we reference (or agree with) the argument from colonialism (I'm not saying the argument from colonialism is wrong, just that it's not needed here). "Someone gives permission. But the entire discipline and industry have been gatekeeping and withholding for so long. They choose what to share and what to keep. They still control the permission." Exactly. As I've pointed out in the past, the use of permissions and licensing preserve and entrench the attitude that ideas are property, that culture is property, and this should be resisted.
Today: 0 Total: 1093 [Direct link] [Share]
