[oats-sig] dojinshi & Mulberry Symbol Set

Just thought I’d give an overview of the objectives of our symbol

Garry,

I'm sure you've considered this in depth, but had you come across  
dojinshi?

I raised exactly the issues you describe with Lawrence Lessig of the  
creative commons a few years ago.
within a few months he published this article:
http://www.lessig.org/content/columns/red3.pdf

I hope like me that you will consider releasing your SVG symbols in  
the public domain.

best wishes

the practical reality is that you are relying on good will in either  
case.
why encumber people?
my interests are primarily with enabling the end-users,
where even the concept of copyright may be a step too far...

Jonathan Chetwynd

j.chetwynd at btinternet.com
http://www.iconomy.org/

+44 (0) 20 7978 1764

On 1 May 2008, at 18:10, Paxtoncrafts Garry wrote:

> Just thought I’d give an overview of the objectives of our symbol  
> set project. Might help everyone to see where we’re coming from.
>
> Mulberry Symbol set project objectives
> Our key customers are Speech and Language Therapists (SaLTs) plus  
> other carers, teaching staff, etc, who are seeking symbol based  
> solutions for their client’s speech and communication problems.
>
> Understanding that market: This group’s main use of symbols and  
> symbol software is in .wmf format (such as PCS, Widget/Rebus,  
> Maketon, etc).  But, a lack of funds within the NHS means that the  
> end-client (perhaps an adult stroke victim or child with cerebral  
> palsy) often does not have access to symbols or symbol-software to  
> enable their communication.  A notable exception to this is for the  
> under-19’s still in education, who do attract some local government  
> funding.  For others it often depends whether family members are  
> willing to provide funds, or grants from charities, etc.
>
> Consequently, many of the commercially available software products,  
> hardware solutions and symbol sets are simply not accessible by a  
> large part of the disabled community. For example, the model for  
> SaLTs in Essex and Suffolk is typically to photocopy black and white  
> symbols from commercial symbol sets that they have purchased and  
> create hardcopy printed charts for each clients – higher forms of  
> AAC are rarely available, except in the schools context.
>
> In this captive market, there is no need for fast response and  
> little competition by symbol developers.  So SaLTs struggle to find  
> modern symbols such as iPod, Wii, etc.  When new addendums or  
> additional symbols are released by commercial suppliers, clients  
> often don’t know about them, plus these are not free - the addendums  
> have to be purchased.  Even worse, where the symbols are bundled in  
> with the software, you often have to re-purchase the symbols each  
> time a new software product is purchased that incorporates symbols,  
> even for the same client PC!
>
> Licensing: Commercial license agreements quite rightly protect the  
> investment of symbol designers organisations, providing their  
> revenue stream.  However, we have found this a limit to innovation.   
> For example, our earlier intent to design a symbol-based internet  
> chat program foundered because existing commercial symbol set  
> suppliers were not willing to allow their symbols to be transmitted  
> across the internet, for obvious commercial reasons.  The only  
> solution that was acceptable was a program that required each client  
> to purchase their own local copy of a symbol set.
>
> Our response:
> -        To create a free symbol set designed for use by anyone with  
> speech problems who requires symbols to support their communication  
> needs.
>
> -        A license as close to “public domain” as possible will be  
> selected (Creative Commons SA-BY), but which protects the  
> significant effort and funding that is being invested from undesired  
> exploitation.  Our preference is to deliver the symbols free of cost  
> at the point of delivery, but commercial gain is permitted, as is  
> the modification and free re-distribution of our symbols.  The  
> license ensures our aims continue in perpetuity, including all  
> derivative works.
>
> -          We are not in the business of competing with existing  
> symbol sets, but we do wish to provide a symbol set that
> o        is at least of equivalent, if not higher quality than those  
> that already exist,
> o        contains modern symbols and is constantly growing in  
> content, but at zero cost to the client.
> o        is designed to appeal to adults (who often find existing  
> symbols somewhat “juvenile” in design)
> o        is a compatible format (eg, .wmf), to allow ours to be  
> incorporated into the existing software and hardware products to  
> complement existing symbol sets
> o        is available in additional formats such as .svg as a  
> resource to support new  initiatives in symbol-based developments,  
> at zero cost to developers.
>
> These were the drivers that inspired us to fire up the project a  
> couple of years ago. I’d certainly be interested to hear from anyone  
> who feels the above scenario has improved (or worsened), as these  
> issues are the lie behind the project justification.
>
> Many thanks
> Garry Paxton

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.becta.org.uk/pipermail/oats-sig/attachments/20080501/f1a1f925/attachment.html 