I found this article quite detailed and interesting. I learned, for example, that attribution used to be just an option out of many for CC licenses, and that with 2.0 it became automatically part of all of them because such a high percentage of people always chose it (the Wikipedia article links to this page explaining the change for the 2.0 license suite).

I also found the table under "types of licenses," "seven regularly used licenses" quite interesting because it connects the licenses with other 'open' and 'free' frameworks, such as the open definition and free cultural works.

The list of court cases towards the end is useful as well., and has the latest case (Great Minds v Fed Ex (2018)).

Altogether the Wikipedia page is relevant to many parts of unit 3, including license types and enforceability. I wonder, for the latter, if a link also to this list of case law on the CC wiki would be useful (though it was last edited in 2017).

Some possible new items to add, relevant to module 5.5, Opening Up Your Institution:

1. OER Africa has an in-depth OER policy review and development toolkit. It looks at issues around developing OER policies from the perspective of students, faculty, institutions, government context, and more. It includes case studies relevant to the regional context with probing questions to consider after each case study. It is from 2012, but many of the considerations about developing and implementing an OER policy that are included in the toolkit are still relevant. This resource can be valuable when thinking about possibly instituting an OER policy at one's own institution. The toolkit is licensed CC BY 4.0, South Africa Institute for Distance Education.

The next two resources are relevant to the section on OER policies because it provides examples of policies along with case studies and challenges that differ in different parts of the world. It can help people see how what works in one place may not work well elsewhere.

1. There is a global open policy report from 2016, ed. Kelsey Wiens and Alek Tarkowski, published by the open policy network: https://openpolicynetwork.org/solving-some-of-the-worlds-toughest-problems-with-the-global-open-policy-report/ It includes reports on open policies in Africa & the Middle East, Asia, Australia, Latin America, Europe, and North America. There is an overview in each section along with case studies. This report is also housed on the CC website: https://creativecommons.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/StateofOpenPolicyFullReport_FINAL-1-1-1-1.pdf The report is licensed CC BY 4.0.

2. The ROER4D project (research on OER for development) produced a report in 2017 called Spotlight on OER policy in the Global South: Case studies from the Research on Open Educational Resources for Development (ROER4D) project. The main questions addressed include: "What is the state of OER policy development in the Global South?" "To what extent do developing countries need OER policies for OER adoption to flourish there?" The report discusses ROER4D research in four countries: Colombia, South Africa, Afghanistan and Mongolia. The report is licensed CC BY 4.0

A new item to add; this is relevant to section 5.3, Creating and Sharing OER. There is a subsection there about considering accessibility from the start in creating/adapting OER, and this toolkit helps one do that.

Open Education Accessibility Toolkit, 2nd edition, by BCcampus (Coolidge, Doner, Robertson and Gray). This toolkit includes specific, practical information on how to make OER accessible, through considering organization of content, font size, colour contrast, how hyperlinks are handled, alternative text for images, and more. https://opentextbc.ca/accessibilitytoolkit/ The toolkit is licensed CC BY 4.0.

Some other possible resources to include, relevant to section 5.2: Finding, Evaluating, and Adapting Resources. Both of these would help to expand out the section on remixing and adapting, by talking about how one might do so and the licensing considerations needed.

1. Queens University Library in Canada has a guide on remixing and adapting existing OER that includes: why one should consider adapting resources, how to do so (what tools one could use, depending on the original source files), how to help ensure one's adaptations are consistent with other elements of the original, and licensing and redistributing the adaptation. This web page doesn't have any licensing information on it, but it's part of a larger guide and the guide is licensed CC BY-SA 3.0.

2. Anita Walz has an excellent chapter in a book called The Evolution of Affordable Content Efforts in the Higher Education Environment: Programs, Case Studies, and Examples (2018): "Valuing Open Textbooks: Derivatives, Adaptation, and Remix". In this chapter Walz discusses a project she was involved in to adapt an open textbook, as well as broader benefits and challenges of doing such adaptations, and how to go about them. This chapter is in a book that is licensed CC BY 4.0, edited by Kristi Jensen and Shane Nackerud.

I found this first module a little unclear; it didn't tell me clearly how to distinguish OER from other things on the internet. it listed a number of things that might count as OER (open resource collections, wikis, MOOCs) but didn't explain well when such things are open or why. For MOOCs, the explanation was given that some aren't open because they require one to purchase a textbook--thereby seeming to equate open to free of cost. I didn't find this one very helpful for distinguishing OER, nor as an additional resource about remixing and adapting works (section 4.4).

Another suggested resource for this section:

Attribution statements for remixed OER content, from Open Oregon: https://openoregon.org/attribution-statements-for-remixed-oer-content/ This content is licensed CC BY 4.0.

This page provides detailed suggestions for how to attribute open educational resources when using them digitally, in print, on slides, on videos, and more. It's focused both on what is required by CC and also how to do the attributions in a readable way when you are combining multiple works into a single source. It also has a link to an "open attribution builder" from Open Washington, which looks quite useful: http://www.openwa.org/attrib-builder/ (licensed CC BY 4.0).

This content is related to section 4.3, on finding and reusing CC licensed works. One of the things people sometimes have trouble with is figuring out how to attribute correctly, in multiple formats, and I think this resource explains it well.

This short video effectively expresses an important point from David Bollier: the idea of the "tragedy of the commons" doesn't work insofar as it relies on thinking of the commons as a thing, a resource that can be consumed. If you think of it as only that (e.g., the ocean as a commons) then it makes sense how it could be depleted or polluted by people "outside" of it, as the video describes. But Bollier argues (as also nicely summarized in "The Commons Short and Sweet" by Bollier), the commons isn't just a resource, it is also a community and the processes, rules, values they use to govern the resource and their relationships to it and to each other. So if people are overusing a resource then it's not because the resource is itself a commons, but rather because somehow the processes that are part of the commons aren't working well. It's not that something is part of a commons that is a problem (resources can be mismanaged in many, non-commons contexts too), it is that the processes and practices for connecting people in a community with the resource need to be adjusted.

This resource is related to unit 1 insofar as CC is discussed as not just a set of legal tools but also a community, many of whose members (which can include anyone who applies a CC license to their work or who uses a CC licensed work correctly) share similar values around cooperation, sharing, equity of access.

I took some time to explore these resources. What I found most interesting is that there are a number of affiliated courses in other countries--there isn't just the copyright course at Harvard, but other courses have taken the original content and modified it for their own contexts. This is really important because copyright differs so much from country to country. Many of the theoretical ideas are the same, but the particular cases and specific provisions in law clearly differ.

Some of the affiliated courses seem to be using a lot of the same material from the Harvard course, including the US court cases, and then adding in a few local cases and examples (see, e.g., this example from Italy). Some seem to just be using the Harvard materials exclusively without the local additions.

This could be a place to see some specific examples and court cases from various parts of the world, except that many of the content from the affiliated courses is hard to deal with (see below).

A number of the courses have their materials hosted on a Harvard Law platform called H2O, and it's very hard to navigate and read...each item seems to open in a different tab on my browser and then you can't get back to the higher level items you started with unless you go back to the earlier tabs. It's kind of frustrating to try to go through.

This resource is relevant to many aspects of unit 2 because it includes information on quite a few of the concepts discussed therein.