Read on Twitter
0/After two decades from birth of the #openmovement, #Open is still a paradox: it represents a challenge to and a concentration of power. @creativecommons @Wikimedia @OKFN @mozilla @edri @internetarchive @communia_eu @commonsnetwork @Karisma @centrumcyfrowe @WikimediaDE
1/In the past 20 years many open initiatives have been launched, trusting that the combined power of networked information services and new governance models would lead to a more democratic society and unleash the Internet to create universal access to knowledge and culture.
2/This revolution did not occur on the expected scale. This is because the web moved away from its original ideals and the open design. As its nature drastically altered, digital power concentrated in the hands of few platform intermediaries.
3/The open movement changed as well. Successful initiatives, such as @Wikipedia and @OpenGovernment, largely materialize when they are driven by external incentives and a large number of people are involved.
4/Platforms have thus increased the presence of #closedgardens, where knowledge and creativity is vertically controlled. Free licensing – the principal tool of the Open movement – is useless in these spaces and at best signals an ideological position without practical effects.
5/Nonetheless, open still owns significant value in the ecosystems that have not undergone #platformisation - professional and institutional systems; we expect them to fall in the domain of the platform logic soon. We need to find alternatives to this logic.
6/This is because such concentration of power denies the core tenets of the open movement. We need to reexamine the assumption that opening resources results in emancipatory consequences as these are in reality more likely to consolidate monopolistic positions.
7/Hence, in an ecosystem dominated by a few platforms, open resources contribute to the power of those who can make use of them. The negative externalities related to the permissive sharing of all kinds of information lead to power imbalances.
8/As a result, roughly two decades after the emergence of the #openmovement, its core issues are no longer the focus of digital policy debates. Attention has instead shifted to other topics, such as #privacy, #AI, and control over networked information systems.
9/In all of this, #Open has not yet managed to impress its normative ideals about sharing on the dominant platforms. We also lack a new normative basis for the movement that connects with a vision of a more just and egalitarian society.
10/ #Open is both a challenge and an enabler of concentrations of power. Open access and information reuse remain powerful challenges to the exclusive control of information goods. Yet, they also imply increasing exposure to the power imbalances that shape society.
11/The deep focus on combating the exclusive control of information resources blindsided us from the growth of platform intermediaries. We initially saw them as allies, while in reality some started veering away from our principles.
12/Still, the Open movement has the capacity to act in policy discussions on the concentration of power by information intermediaries. Ideas of openness and digital commons provide a positive vision for the future of technology, making this type of advocacy as relevant as ever.
13/ Open movement needs to harden its core concepts against abuse and unintended externalities. And to look beyond the core concern of opening up informational resources to understand other emerging issues forming today’s digital #zeitgeist. This is the #NewOpen.
14/We believe that the paradox of Open can be solved here in #Europe as policymakers and key stakeholders have the ambition to build an #InternetForThePeople – one that can provide the basis for a more just and democratic society. To do this, we need to act on three main lines.
15/It is time to define once again what “Open” means. #Open shouldn’t be limited to resources’ release; we also needs management of #commons, maximising public benefit while preserving balance between openness, fundamental rights and values.
16/Creating a sum of our movement’s parts. We are just one among many organisations that identify with the vision of digital commons, openness, and access to knowledge. We are looking for partners who want to think together in terms of collective impact and systemic change.
17/Building a #SharedDigitalEurope: digital policies can’t be limited to controlling platforms and fighting unfair power distribution. Our vision paper, written with @commonsnetwork, defines principles to create a true digital public sphere. http://shared-digital.eu"> http://shared-digital.eu
18/ @OpenFuture identifies with the vision of openness and access to knowledge. We are part of a new cohort of organisations that launched in a different zeitgeist than that of 20 years ago. Reply if you are with us!
19/We believe that policymaking is also worldbuilding. We are looking beyond the current digital agenda and seeking to contribute to the digital agenda of the next European Commission.
20/ Read the essay on the Paradox of Open, co-authored by @paul_keller and @atarkowski, here: http://paradox.openfuture.eu"> http://paradox.openfuture.eu
