Is it that OER is of two types: One is that OER released under open licenses, and the other one is released under public domain. What is the difference between OER under public domain and open material that appears through google?

Social business is non-dividend and non-profit making business - Discuss strengths and weakness.

Hi, Chandraiah @esampallyc9,
Do you mean The difference between resources licensed under Creative Commons and those other online resources that have neither Creative Commons licence nor copyright specified on them?

Something that is in the public domain has no copyright, and is open to use in any way. It could have had it’s copyright expire or have been released into the public domain by the author. OER in this situation requires no permissions for use.

Something found in Google could have a variety of restrictions because Google pulls from anything. OER have various interpretations and definitions so it shouldn’t be assumed that your definition matches the person who shared the OER. It could be fully copyright protected (all rights reserved), have a Creative Commons license (CC-BY, ND, NC, SA), or be released into the public domain (CC0). Each OER found in this way must be reviewed to identify how it has been licensed and what the restrictions to it are. Permission may be required to use.

CC licensing varies. The most open is CC0 (public domain) and CC-BY (attribute the author only, can remix or reuse in any way). The lease open, and arguably not OER, is CC-BY-ND-NC (attribution to the author, no derivatives, and non-commercial use - you cannot change or use for commercial use) or CC-BY-ND (no derivatives). If you can’t use the OER in an open way, it is most restrictive and defeats the purpose of “openness for all”.

So to answer your first question, OER released under CC0 or PD, which are not actually licenses but a waiver of copy rights, and OER licensed under CC-BY/SA/NC/ND, which are open licenses that work with copyright to clearly define what permissions are granted for the work, are the same thing, they simply have ways to clarify for users what rights they do and do not have.

1.The idea of RLO is older than that of OER. 2. RLOs being meant for ‘reuse’ will not have a restrictive licence.
Based on 1 & 2 why did we need a new term ‘OER’ when it is basically an RLO? Could you please help me understand this?

OERs are teaching, learning and research materials which are released under open license.

License states the conditions/restrictions under which the owner of the resource inform the prospective users that what are the conditions/restrictions for the reuse of the resource/s.

For example, CC-BY license means that the owner wants the prospective user of the resource to attribute him.

Similarly, CC-BY-SA-NC means that the owner of the resource wants the prospective users to Attribute him, Maintain the same license terms in the enhanced versions of the resource and Do not use the resource for economic considerations.

All the terms stated in the license are binding for the users.

Public Domain
The resources released under Public Domain or CC0 license do not any binding conditions for the reuse of the resource.

There are many other types of open licenses in addition to Creative Commons License like Crown Copyright, GNU License. The google search may result in any type of resources which are released under open license using google advance search feature.