For me the ultimate “shirt and trousers” case is the very fact that open was meant to allow us to stop thinking about copyright – but over time we see that actually it forces a lot of us to become quasi-lawyers and mini-copyright-police. This has been identified in more formal terms by Niva Elkin-Koren, who is a legal scholar.

Another issue is the inherent tension between being open and being sustainable, I think that for too long open advocates did not want to discuss the issue of in particular funding content creation – assuming that the commons just happens, and does not have to be sustained.