Open Directory Project Adopts Debian Social Contract 45
An anonymous reader says "The Open Directory Project is owned by AOL/Netscape and the status of the copyright and amount of corporate interest has always been a question. In light of a coming copyright revision, the staff was urged to give something back to assure that the volunteers contributing to the directory would not be taken advantage of, as they were with CDDB/Gracenote. The Debian social contract was brought up and was met with surprising support from Netscape. Here is the ODP's social contract. It's seen as a great triumph for the volunteer community that has worked so hard on the largest human edited directory on the web." I was always skeptical of dmoz, but I'm pleased to see this step taken. Now if only Gracenote would be good enough to do the same. Oh wait, that would imply that they had souls.
Re:DMOZ? Who the hell care? (Score:1)
Please... (Score:1)
Oh wait, that would imply that they had souls.
I really enjoy most of the content here on Slashdot, but can we keep it on a professional level?
Much obliged.
DMOZ? Who the hell care? (Score:1)
C'mon, if even AOL themself, the parent company itself, chooses not to use Netscape browser or DMOZ directory, that has got to tell you SOMETHING.
self promotion isn't a huge problem (Score:1)
Just to become a DMOZ editor, you have to provide several *good* examples of websites that you would like to add to the category you are applying to. If you sell widgets, that means you probably have to submit sites about your competitors. Editors even have slight handicaps, such as they can not, for any reason, have their own site marked as "cool". It doesn't make any difference if their site really is the coolest in the category, or even if it was another editor who marked it cool. Even if it was marked cool before you applied, you are required to uncool it.
The vast majority of editors are very even handed. The vast majority of biased editors get kicked out quickly.
--
Re:Oh PLEASE! (Score:1)
--
They are not accountable (Score:1)
--
Leandro Guimarães Faria Corsetti Dutra
DBA, SysAdmin
Re:The editors have the REAL power over dmoz (Score:1)
--
Leandro Guimarães Faria Corsetti Dutra
DBA, SysAdmin
Re:GPL does. BSD, zlib, and X don't. (Score:1)
Not quite. The usual text is "either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version." That's not quite the same as "This version, until we decide to change it, then that version only." The difference is in the option to keep using the older version.
-----
Re:Show me a license that doesn't say that (Score:1)
The editors have the REAL power over dmoz (Score:1)
Someone like Musicbrainz [musicbrainz.com] could just as easily restrict access to their database at a later date, even though it's currently licensed under OpenContent. (I really doubt they would do this, BTW).
Look, if Netscape chose to screw the community by closing or limiting access to the database, it would surley piss off the editors which would then be cause them to stop doing submissions. No submissions = No database. I suspect that projects like dmoz and grub, who rely on a constant influx of information to stay current, will be kept honest by default That said, I think that dmoz has taken a step in the right direction trying to address these issues.
Shameless Plug: Check out Grub [grub.org]!
Re:The editors have the REAL power over dmoz (Score:1)
Re:Oh PLEASE! (Score:1)
--
Re:Please... (Score:1)
I know, I know. I'm just messing with your head
- Steeltoe
Re:Distributed bias (Score:1)
True, the balance of subject matter will more closely model peoples intrests however this does not make the listed sites any better. The links submitted will likely be by the person responsible for the site. This does not filter the noise. Perhaps they need a moderation system?
For example, their is a very good tutorial site on Guitar chords and scales and such called Dansm's Home Page [harvard.edu]. I did find this under Arts/Music/Instruments/Stringed/Guitar/Acoustic/Ar tists/ but I think I would moderate that this be placed in the Music Education section as well.
The Debian social contract (Score:1)
Luckily this is the contract from Debian.org and not Sea.org ... while Mozilla might be a good thing to play around with, I wouldn't want to be stuck into using it for one billion years.
Re:Please... (Score:1)
--
Not a contract, a "contract" (Score:1)
Unsettling MOTD at my ISP.
The real social contract... (Score:1)
Signed,
John Q. Hacker III
Re:self promotion isn't a huge problem (Score:1)
And that same editor also is editor for a mental health directory. Strangely (or not if you know much about Scientology) it is almost entirely anti-mental health or alternative treatment stuff. It is under "health and safety" not "oppossing views"
To me, this says that the editor's biases do play a large role. I was happy to see that opposing views _was_ linked to from the Scientology main directory entry. Perhaps that is enough. But I really felt like I was looking at an advertisement for Scientology.
Re:Not a contract, a "contract" (Score:1)
A contract is, according to Business Law - A Streamlined Course for Students and Business People by Robert Emerson, J.D. and John W. Hardwicke, LL.B., a legally enforceable agreement, express or implied, with the following elements:
This contract has all of the elements:
Re:Nice to see. But please give credit where it's (Score:1)
http://dmoz.org/socialcontract.html [dmoz.org] first paragraph: [...] inspired by, derived from, the Debian Social Contract [...]
-----------
Re:Oh PLEASE! (Score:1)
Re:I wish I was Bruce Perens (Score:1)
I would think that was so it would be above most users' "highlight" threshold, thereby stopping several million people who hadn't bothered to read the rest of the thread from flaming him. Besides, do you really not think that he's reached the karma limit already?
43rd Law of Computing:
Show me a license that doesn't say that (Score:2)
This is nothing new, and certainly nothing noteworthy.
Re:Please... (Score:2)
Re:Nice to see. But please give credit where it's (Score:2)
Dmoz was never in doubt. CDDB always was. (Score:2)
CDDB was always free of charge, but never offered under any sort of community copyright. It was always clearly, unambiguously under threat of becoming a pay-for-play closed database.
I hope you don't think your book and record reviews on Amazon belong to you. Don't be surprised if a tome similar to the All Music Guides suddenly materializes, made up of the best customer reviews from Amazon. And they won't owe you a penny.
What happens if they break it? (Score:2)
Re:DMOZ? Who the hell care? (Score:2)
If you try it, I think you'll find it's pretty damn good.
GPL does. BSD, zlib, and X don't. (Score:2)
Virtually every license I've ever read has stated "Subject to change without notice".
Including the GNU General Public License [gnu.org], but not including the BSD license [xfree86.org], the X license [x.org], or the zlib license [gzip.org].
What bothers me most about the Open Directory license is that the requirement to keep checking back home makes the license to use a specific version of the data non-perpetual and makes the license not a free documentation license. [gnu.org]
And no tracking either (Score:2)
Oh PLEASE! (Score:2)
Web Marketing 101:
Pleasantly surprised (Score:2)
Too bad other companies can't do the same thing.
not going to say much else, because I'm all ranted out for today
;-)
Check out the Vinny the Vampire [eplugz.com] comic strip
Nice to see. But please give credit where it's due (Score:3)
They are obviously concerned that people not use their data without proper attribution. :-) . I guess they didn't read this text at the end of the social contract:
So, DMOZ, please add attribution to Debian to the document. I wouldn't mind a credit for creating the original social contract, which I get in a note at the end of the Debian version, but I'll settle for Debian getting credit.But they are using the social contract without proper attribution
Thanks
Bruce
Re:DMOZ? Who the hell care? (Score:3)
DMoz is used here [aol.com] as well as here [netscape.com]. If you don't believe they're taken from DMoz, try searching for for "Slashdot" or browsing through the categories a bit.
As for Mozilla/Gecko, haven't you heard of the Komodo project? No doubt it will debut in an embedded form in AOL 7.0 and not to mention Netscape 6.5 and that AOL/Gateway device it's already running in.
I wish I was Bruce Perens (Score:3)
--
Re:Not a license, a "promise" (Score:3)
Actually, this is a contract. Any content submitted prior to a change is bound by the license put in place. Of course, if you want to protect yourself, you should capture the existing contract and any revisions. This will allow you to hold them to a particular version of the contract.
Let's be honest, except for some classes of marriage, no one gives contract's "forever".
Re:Show me a license that doesn't say that (Score:3)
This is nothing new, and certainly nothing noteworthy.
I fully agree. However, my opinion is subject to change without notice.
-
Re:Skeptical about DMOZ? (Score:4)
Skeptical about DMOZ? (Score:4)
That was several years ago, though. I recently checked back to see how the project was going, and it's *huge*. DMOZ is robust enough to compete with Yahoo, but without the bells, whistles, banners, portal features, and other crap that make Yahoo so bloated.
So check out DMOZ [dmoz.org]. You might, like me, make it your usual search directory.
Re:Come on Taco (Score:4)
Oh wait, that would imply that they had souls.
Oh, fuckin' grow up, Taco
You got modded down for failure to use the proper form...
"Come on (Jamie/Taco/Cowboy), a comment like that will not impress upon (MSFT/RIAA/government/anyone) the (seriousness/commitment/31337 skillz/good looks) of the (Linux/Free software/open source/GNU/troll) community. We need (leaders/journalists/dorks) such as yourself to set an example in this matter by doing (the right thing/drugs).
Yours,
(Linus/RMS/Bruce Perens/Trollaxor)
Upcoming forms include :t se.cxn ew-law/patent/boy-band
and the Witty-yet-totally-off-topic
What-happened-to-the-quality-of-slashdot?
Goa
This-company-rocks/sucks
God-I-hate-this-
Impassioned-call-to-arms
G.H.
What if we DIDN'T have a beowulf cluster of these...
Oops - Open Mouth, insert foot (Score:5)
Bruce
Not a license, a "promise" (Score:5)
<I>By using the Open Directory Project (ODP) in any way you are agreeing to comply with these terms, which we may update without notice and encourage you to check back here at any time</i>
So what they are saying is - "We'll play nice until we decide we don't want to anymore."
Re:What happens if they break it? (Score:5)
You take them to court.
This document is a contract. It might not look like a contract, but it is an agreement entered into by two parties with an exchange of favors.
Until they change it, it is binding on them and you - if you agree to it. If they change it, the current version governs any content submitted up to the change.
If they break it, then you take them to court. You get an order compelling them to honor the agreement. Since they didn't outline a limitation of damages, you could also seek damages from them.
I have worked in a lot of big companies. I am surprised that something this straight-forward, clean, and "right", was able to make it out into the world.
Distributed bias (Score:5)
It reminds me of Bucky Fuller's Dymaxion World Map [bfi.org], which divides the earth into lots of triangles, then localizes map distortion into each triangle. The net result is that overall, the map is very accurate. In contrast, the Mercator Projection localizes all its error at the edge, so Greenland looks larger than North America.
In the same way, having lots of subject editors instead of one company doing the editing should in theory localize the bias to individual subjects. Chances are better that the Open Directory as a whole will be less biased.