Posts about open-source

Remix me

July 7, 2006 by Jeff Jarvis
, , ,

The BBC just announced the winners of its competition to redesign the BBC home page. Here’s the winner and here are the runners-up.

The winner is called Malkovich because its’ about “seeing the BBC through someone else’s eyes, fascinating perspective.” The creataors recognize the important reality of the world now: that there is “a network of people that make up a layer over the top of the BBC architecture.” The page’s cool gadget lets you slide the view of content from you … to the BBC … to the world.

What’s more important than the winner, of course, is the openness of the competition itself. Now if this were just an exercise in openness — here, kids, you go play here — then it would be a cynical ruse. But what it really is, instead, is a way to tap the wisdom and imagination of the smart crowd gathered around the BBC. Not doing that is being deaf to the possibilities. The BBC has been trying to open-source itself. This is one good step in that direction.

By the way, one good line informing one of the runners-up: “I don’t want a portal, I want an information workspace.”

(I get in trouble sometimes when I link to things and don’t mention that I’m mentioned there. I think doing so is more egotistical. Others argue with that. So beware that I’m mentioned in the BBC team’s rational for their winning pick…. and I’m humbled to be there. No, really….)

Open-source open-source

June 27, 2006 by Jeff Jarvis
, ,

Ad Age critic and On the Media cohost Bob Garfield is writing a book about how the open-source world changes marketing and, so, he’s writing it openly on a new blog.

The idea is to put it together, chapter by chapter, with ideas, criticism and corrections coming from all of you out in the Bobosphere. It’s no wiki; I’m the sole author. And it will be owned lock, stock and hypertext by my employer, Crain Communications. But who cares? It’s being produced in full public view for public view.

Go see his chapter outline and get to work.

Open for business

June 18, 2006 by Jeff Jarvis

The Times has two stories today about enabling the public to create together — one a business story about customers who design products with companies and the other a style story about Ze Frank having the people formerly known as his audience writing his routines.

The open corporation

June 5, 2006 by Jeff Jarvis

I’ve been saying that the wise company will be open not only in enabling their customers to be their customer-service department and their marketing arm and their ad agency but also their product-development department. Kraft is opening itself up to outside product suggestions:

Hungry for new ideas, Kraft Foods Inc. is turning to a new source of inspiration: its customers.

The nation’s largest food company is launching a program to weigh unsolicited ideas from customers and others. The move represents a departure from past practice, said Mary Kay Haben, senior vice president at the company. In the past, she said, “we would have said, ‘Thank you, but we’re not accepting ideas.’ ”

The shift is part of a broader move toward “open innovation” being embraced by Kraft’s chief executive, Roger Deromedi, who has been under pressure to improve results.

Except get a load of the business terms:

If Kraft is interested in using your idea and the idea is protected–or protectible–by a patent or copyright, we may negotiate with you for license rights. Your compensation will be determined as a part of those negotiations.

If Kraft is interested in using your idea and it is not protected (or protectible) by a patent or copyright, but is new to Kraft and we adopt it, Kraft may, at its sole discretion, grant you a nominal award. In no case will that nominal award exceed $5000.

Another good idea killed by a lawyer. I’m keeping my recipe for Cheesey Oreos to myself, then.

Closed co-op?

May 12, 2006 by Jeff Jarvis
, ,

Tell me if I’m wrong about Google Co-op — because it’s damned near impossible to tell what it is from their description — but it seems to be a closed system for enriching Google but not the internet. That is, it gets us to give Google meta data about sites that are supposed to improve their searches but, so far as I can tell, that data is not available to anyone else. Closed? Evil? You tell me.