From ICommons wiki

Note: How can you help here?

Help us by adding/editing topics, helping us select structures and volunteering to be in a team etc.

Contents 1 Potential target audiences: 2 Structure 3 Areas/topics to be covered: 4 How can you help? 5 Comments

[edit] Potential target audiences:

(We may not be able to afford simultaneous translation for this stream - so we'll either have to stick to English or have two streams - one in english, the other in Japanese)

Debaters will come from the pool of awesome intellectual talent in the movement - particularly from CCI and specific sectors relevant to the topic (more below)

[edit] Structure

We need help here deciding which format we should use - more about this on wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debate.

Firstly, in terms of whether it will be public debate, policy debate, rule-based competitive debate etc.

Secondly, whether we'll enable people to self-select, or give them the topic and point of view just before, or choose the topic early on but don't tell them which point of view they will need to take, or choose it out of a hat etc.

Suggested Structure

(1) Allow people to self select for the debates since those who want to debate a particular topic, if they aren't given an opportunity in the debate track will debate it in other sessions, question times etc.

(2) For each topic there should be at least three people or teams debating a topic and each team should argue on that topic twice, once for and once against.

So team 1 argues for A against team 2, and -A against team 3, team 2 will argue for -A against team 1 and for A against team 3, team 3 will argue for A against team 1 and -A against team 2.

(3) Allow people to self select and to choose topics early, knowing that they will argue both for and against their pet topics.

(4) Time: Argument for topic: four minutes Argument against topic: five minutes to answer Response by first team: two minutes

[edit] Areas/topics to be covered:

- ‘The open content debate has enabled publishers to get more content from creators for free.’

- ‘You can only call something an ‘Open Educational Resource’ if it allows derivatives to be made.’

- ‘Collecting societies need to be replaced’

- licences with non commercial attributes are not truly "free"

- By creating an alternative within the current copyright system, creative commons licences are reducing the pressure to abolish the entire copyright system

[edit] How can you help?

Put your name/username below if you would like to be on a team/organize a team or help moderate. Please include relevant experience etc if possible:

Debaters:

Organizers:

Moderators:

Marketing to target groups in Japan and elsewhere:

[edit] Comments

I think that there might be better alternatives to the debate structure proposed above, which seems a bit competitive, with teams exchanging arguments. I would look for ways to build consensus / sensibly establish differences. One interesting project is the of Free Voices meeting organized this year by Dropping Knowledge. Tarkowski