In a nutshell, once you release materials under an open license you lose control. It doesn’t really matter where you put materials- even if you just keep them on your server – an open license empowers anyone to legally download, make their own copies available and rehost and you can’t demand that they be taken down. [unless you’ve got a very odd open license; For example, I don’t think even the more restrictive forms of CC (perhaps CC BY ND NC) would prevents making and hosting identical copies].

My proposal is that once content is publicly available OER providers can’t control it so they shouldn’t waste effort or worry about trying to.

The question of secondary hosts, such as Jorum, brings this into sharper focus. As I see it UKOER projects have an obligation to provide JORUM with copies of (or in some circumstances links to) their stuff. I don’t think the projects have an obligation to keep providing copies or try to update their stuff after they’ve given it to Jorum. I can imagine that Jorum and projects may decide on policies and procedures to version content, but that is independent of the programme and reliant on both parties having the willingness and resource to manage the process – and I have no idea what Jorum’s thoughts on this are.

Edit: I don’t want to minimise the problems one would have if you released third party material, but I think once it’s openly licensed you’ve lost control – and, though there’s an element of risk involved, that’s actually a good thing

If this is the case, then OER projects should ONLY deposit the metadata records (including a persistent link to the learning object) to the JORUM OER. This will allow projects to implement a fast take down policy in the case of any copyright issue has been risen.