The NOSE

Sun's Project Darkstar and the Next Generation Learning Platform

Last week I had the opportunity to meet Sun's Chief Gaming Officer Chris Melissinos. Over lunch and at a panel discussion at St. Paul College (recently recognized as a Sun Center of Excellence) we had a wide ranging conversation about the future of educational technology, gaming, and internet culture. The event was graciously hosted by Warren Sheaffer of St. Paul College and Robert Reagan of Sun Microsystems.

Why am I so interested in gaming? I believe that the next generation learning platform will see a convergence of three elements: virtual worlds, gaming, and learning management systems. Gaming will become an essential part of learning and Sun's Project Darkstar is quickly emerging as the leading open source contender in this space. Wonderland, which sits on top of Darkstar, is Sun's equivalent of Second Life. Many of us are experimenting in Second Life but the future of education in Virtual Worlds, especially once we factor in the needs of the enterprise, will more likely go in the direction of environments such as Darkstar+Wonderland. (If you want to know about the potential of research collaboration in these types of spaces, check out Sun's MPK20.)

The current LMS, which we are all familiar with, will need to evolve from the currently bloated monolithic crapware to a true Learning Management Operating System (LMOS). The learning platform of the future will need a substrate that performs the mundane but essential bookkeeping functions such as authentication, authorization, and integration with backend systems. The LMOS should look more like the linux kernel: a lean, mean traffic cop that sits below the application layer and mediates access to common services.

Is there a Blackboard killer on the horizon? Yes. Forces such as Project Darkstar are gaining momentum in the education galaxy. Learning management systems that are not open source friendly or patent friendly will increasingly be at risk.

Second Life To Open Source Server Code

The news that we have been waiting for: Second Life intends to open source its server code. There are other options for creating virtual worlds but Linden Labs is clearly in the lead. The open source kehre will keep them in the lead, at least in the near term with the educational community.

Chandler: What Went Wrong?

Announced with great fanfare in 2002 as the "Microsoft Exchange killer", Chandler promised to a "revolutionary" open source personal information manager.

Chandler's brainchild Mitch Kapor provided an initial $5 million. The Mellon Foundation got on the bandwagon by providing $1.6 Million and a consortium of 25 Universities comprising the "Common Solutions Group" threw in another $1.25 Million.

Many moons and millions later we have at best a "pretty buggy and incomplete calendar application that's not very impressive compared to the 58 me-too Web 2.0 calendars that came out last year, each of which was developed by two college kids in their spare time, one of whom really just drew mascots....Chandler doesn't even have a mascot." (Joel Spolsky, Joel on Software).

What went wrong?

Joel Spolsky takes a look at Chandler in his review of Scott Rosenberg's Dreaming in Code. A MUST READ (Spolsky's blog posting and Rosenberg's book) for understanding the pitfalls in software development, project management, and possibly life itself.

Can Open Source Rest Easy?: Another Legal Scholar Weighs In

I have already mentioned John Mayer's excellent podcast interview with Professor Vince Chiapetta. Mayer's discussion with Professor Mary LaFrance (Willam S. Boyd Professor of Law, UNLV) also advances our understanding of the Blackboard patent case. Professor LaFrance, a high honors graduate of Duke University School of Law, teaches intellectual property law and is co-author of an intellectual property casebook published by West.

Let me highlight a couple of issues that jumped out at me during the LaFrance interview:

Can Blackboard sue a user for patent infringement? The answer is yes. According to Professor LaFrance, part of Blackboard's strategy "probably is to discourage universities from developing their own system...because the threat of litigation could cause some universities to terminate those efforts." Mayer then raised an interesting counter point for consideration. Blackboard has publically stated that it does not intend to come after universities or "faculty". Are these public statements binding in any way?  Or are they empty gestures because Blackboard can change its mind at anytime? According to Professor LaFrance, such public representations could be grounds for a defense of estoppel. If in the future Blackboard sues an open source project or a university for patent infringement, then estoppel is available, at least in theory, as a defense.

It goes without saying that this is all speculation and it's not at all clear how strong a defense estoppel would provide. However, if Professor LaFrance is even the slightest bit correct, then there is no immediate pressure on open source. Sakai, Moodle, and Universities potentially have a defense which is not available to Desire2Learn.

My conclusion? Our aim should be to maintain a common front by pressuring Blackboard into dropping its lawsuit against Desire2Learn. The legal and political route will take a long time, will be expensive all around, and at the end of the day everyone will lose. Following the Educause precedent, it would be helpful if organizations such as Sakai made a strong public statement urging Blackboard to drop its lawsuit.

Sakai Needs to Clarify its Position and Soon

It's been nearly two months since the Sakai Project announced with great fan fare that it was retaining legal counsel on the elearning patents threat. The clock is ticking and the silence is palpable.

Some of us are concerned that Sakai will cut a separate deal with Blackboard to protect its own narrow interests while leaving Desire2Learn and other commercial entities twisting in the wind.  Desire2Learn has chosen not to take the easy route and is admirably fighting on behalf of the entire software industry. Sakai needs to take a similar principled stand and use its clout to do the right thing and not fall prey to Blackboard's divide and conquer strategy. If Sakai intends to wait and see how the Desire2Learn case plays itself out, then say so.

Note: If Sakai's legal strategy is to open up a patent re-examination through the US Patent office, then it should coordinate those efforts with D2L's legal team. Otherwise, D2L's legal case could be severely compromised. (In the event that a patent re-examination fails, D2L's court battle will become much harder.) I am also not sure if other entities are considering opening up the patent re-examination front. If so, I would urge the different parties to coordinate their efforts.

Sakai has an important leadership in the higher education software community. In order for open source projects to thrive we need to develop together an ecosystem that gives room to fair competitition among all players, including commercial software providers such as D2L, Angel, and eCollege.