Re: Documentation Standards was Re: [ox-en] UserLinux
- From: Russell McOrmond <russell flora.ca>
- Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 17:09:01 -0500 (EST)
I think it is important to note that you can disagree with some of these
points, and still be in agreement with the general thrust.
On Tue, 9 Dec 2003, Patrick Anderson wrote:
The GPL locks the gate open.
Note that it doesn't get rid of the concept of a lock or having a gate,
it just locks *this* gate open. It protects the rights of the creators of
software to make that determination for themselves, not to be changed by a
third party -- even if that third party is a creator of a legal derivative
work.
The reason this is so important to humanity is because IP is NOT property.
This is one of the many reasons why some folks in UN discussions are
using the acronym PCT (Patents, copyrights, trademarks) to replace IPR,
and to replace the use of IPR to mean "Intellectual Productions Rights" if
it is used:
http://weblog.flora.org/article.php3?story_id=533
IP is an excuse to disallow my synapses their full functionality. IP
cripples consumers to increase dependency. The goal of IP law is to
eventually locked closed all human intellect.
When we get beyond IPR to discuss PCT, does that feeling still apply?
Is copyright an excuse to disallow your synapses their full
functionality? If it is, is it a justifiable limitation as a tradeoff?
Do you believe that creators should receive moral and material rewards for
their creations? Is it a matter of yes/no, or how much?
I happen to believe that to creators that copyright is like water: too
little and you dehydrate, and too much and you drown. The negative
feelings most of us have towards current copyright laws are because we are
drowning, but is abolishing (and thus dehydrating) a reasonable response?
I have found few that believe that plagiarism should be legal, but also
few that believe that anyone should be handed over governance control of
all ICT tools in order to protect against rights infringement. How do we
go from our current unhealthy drowning situation to a healthy situation
without missing the mark and dehydrating instead?
RMS recognized this as a form of oppression and found a hack to keep the
elite from removing our independence.
I have yet to be convinced it is a hack rather than a legitimate
codification in contract law of the creators' rights protected in
copyright. I believe the GNU GPL is less of a 'hack' than the
license-of-the-hour stuff (different per product, per customer, per
version, per patch) we see from vendors like Microsoft.
---
Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <http://www.flora.ca/>
Governance software that controls ICT, automates government policy, or
electronically counts votes, shouldn't be bought any more than
politicians should be bought. -- http://www.flora.ca/russell/
_______________________
http://www.oekonux.org/