Science question: I am researching disorder in open culture (open culture defined as referring to the actors, practices and produce that constitute an environment of open sharing, prosumerism, copyright liberalization activism and collaborative development work).
My hypothesis is that the immanent and ubiquitous disorder (unstable, autonomous, illegal, unpaid and irregular practices) is a most significant part of what makes open culture vibrant, dynamic, innovative, productive and even at times what makes it competitive (compared to similar conventional/proprietary/controlled/corporate practices). In other words, that this disorder is a strength in the open culture, not a flaw. Do you agree? Disagree? Why and why not? Secondly, I am looking for particular examples from open culture where disorder is appearant. Thank you, Christian
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
