| Who we are | Organizations | Get Involved! | Helpdesk |
| Weblog | About FLORA | Server project | F.A.Q. |
|
|
|||||||
| ||||||||
Election 2006 (and beyond): Digital Copyright Canada
From: aland_-at-_striker.ottawa.on.ca (Alan DeKok)
Date: 2 Feb 1999 14:50:48 -0500
References: <199902021546.KAA09348@striker.ottawa.on.ca>
In article <Pine.LNX.4.04.9902021051590.17667-100000@fox.flora.ottawa.on.ca>, <russell@flora.ottawa.on.ca> wrote: > > Here we go again ;-) > >Referencing: http://linuxtoday.com/stories/2754.html > >Note: The phrase 'Open Source' did not appear anywhere in this story. > >On Tue, 2 Feb 1999, Alan DeKok wrote: > >> So by REFUSING help from companies, and by REFUSING to give our help >> to those companies, we're helping free software. > > How is a company that believes in Intellectual Property going to help >Free Software? Corel & Wine. 'nough said. > Free Software isn't just a software licence, it is a way >of looking at information. What you are complaining about is the clash >between these two different opposite philosophies, and a final realization >by many that the two cannot co-exist in the same mind. And the way to convert your opponent is to shoot him, instead of helping him? This is what RMS seems to be advocating. > Remember: RMS is not a fan of 'Open Source' which is in my mind, at >best, a migratory tool. I tend to agree with him: You can't continue to >have a world where "What is mine is mine, and what is yours is ours". My opinion: What's mine is ours, and if I give you free stuff, you're likely to listen to what I say, and maybe believe it, too. > Open Source is providing is a temporary bridge between the two opposing >worlds. What RMS is trying to do is to get some people off of that bridge >before it collapses, and get some more people onto the Free Software side. He's trying to prevent people from benefiting from the free exchange of ideas. He's saying "no one can use RMS's ideas unless you do what RMS says". I fail to see how this is different from companies patenting ideas, and suing people who try to use those patents. > Public libraries were also used as a tool by the propriatary information >industry to increase literacy and thus a market for propriatary works. And increased literacy is a bad thing? All available evidence shows that the free exchange of ideas leads to increased personal choice. You can choose to be oppressed, but the odds are that you won't, if you have access to Voltaire, Orwell, etc. >This was done in much the same way that Apple, Microsoft and others >currently "donate" works to schools to create a future (captive) audience >for their products. Like drugs pushers give "free" samples to get people hooked. But are you really better off if you DON'T tell people their options? Are you willing to live in a world where people are PREVENTED from making their own choices about their lives? > Copyright/Patents are used to "have your cake and eat it too" (IE: > Tell everyone your secret, make money from them, but still restrict > the shareability of that information in order to make more money). The original intent of copyrights & patents was to INCREASE the sharing of information by protecting the inventor, allowing him to benefit from his labor, but also to force him to tell everyone about his ideas. This is a Good Thing. >> In contrast, RMS would close public libraries to anyone who didn't >> give away everything they wrote. Damn it, when I write something, >> it's MINE, not HIS to control. > > He wasn't writing to you or to anyone else who believes in information >ownership. I believe I own my mind, my thoughts, my ideas, and my property. I will share those with who I please, when I please. I'm sorry you believe otherwise. > He was writing to those who are interested in Free Software as > a forward-looking philosophy, not just as a software licence. Those who > believe that intellectual works can (or should) be owned cannot really be > convinced otherwise any more than people like myself can be convinced that > Intellectual Property has any legitimicy. And we're back to religious wars. I'm free to do what I want with my property, as RMS is free to do what he wants with his. What frustrates me is that RMS says "I want a free and open exchange of ideas", but he then forces me to bow to his gods before allowing me to participate. > Eithor something is a secret, or it is not. If you publish your poem to >your girlfriend, then it is obviously not a secret. And why do you want >to restrict access to that story for 'publication'? Maybe it's because >you want to make money off of it? I've got to pay the rent, and put food on the table. So yes, an income is a Good Thing. I publish it because I want people to use my ideas. I get paid for it because I don't want to starve. I want attributions for that article because I want to be recognized for the work I've done. Is that wrong? > This all boils down to a money issue, and a fundraising model. > Don't at all try to convince me it has anything to do with thought > control - it has everything to do with money and nothing else. I disagree. RMS says he wants free information. His actions make information more expensive, and more restricted. This inclines me to believe that he really wants thought control. I refuse to convert to his beliefs, no matter how wonderful they may seem. It's my right to be a crotchety bastard, if I so choose. > A secret is a secret, and people deserve privacy. Copyright/Patents > have nothing at all to do with privacy and everything to do with an > extremely narrow fundraising model. Patents were originally a tool for forcing public disclosure of trade secrets. I like that idea, I don't like their current use. >> Welcome to 1984: Slavery is Freedom. > > Welcome to the 21'st century where hopefully money will not continue to >be used as a form of slavery. I wish I could be so optimistic. Alan DeKok.
| Please read the FLORA.org Terms and Conditions before you submit information to FLORA.org | |
Join the Blue Ribbon Online Free Speech Campaign(USA) (Canada) |
 FLORA Community Web
(FLORA.ORG) is sponsored by FLORA
Community Consulting (FLORA.CA).
|