semweb

For those who don't know what Freebase is yet, read Tim O'Reilly's post on the topic first, then come back here.

Now, for the rest of you compulsive blog readers - consider Freebase vs. Google.

Google organizes information by creating indexes of that information - using the fair use exception to create those indexes. Freebase is different.

They're pulling in all the CC-licensed material they can find on the web - hence the emphasis on the bootstrapping of their database with Wikipedia content.

This makes sense. Freebase can only do its semantic magic by making entire documents open to the web for the addition of semantic annotation. In other words - building indexes is not good enough anymore. If Freebase is to fulfill its purpose to bootstrap the semantic web it must exceed the bounds of fair use. Hence the necessity of fueling Freebase with CC-licensed content.

So does Freebase become a CC freeloader? Not at all.

In fact Freebase seems likely to give CC-licensed content a strategic advantage over non-CC-licensed content. Given a web enabled with meaning vs. the web of today, which would you rather surf? Traditionally copyrighted material that is harder to pull into the semantic sphere due to legal barriers could end up looking static and tired by comparison.

So it seems that Freebase may be able to catalyze a virtuous cycle of Creative Commons licensing.

This raises the possibility of a new intersection between copyright law and the web:

The success of Google and the search economy as a whole is driven off of the fair use exception of copyright law. Could it be that the CC licensing model turns out to be an a key enabler of Web 3.0?

It's an intriguing possibility.

Jeff LaPorte
EQO Founder and Chief Architect