| Who we are | Organizations | Get Involved! | Helpdesk |
| Weblog | About FLORA | Server project | F.A.Q. |
|
|
|||||||
| ||||||||
Election 2006 (and beyond): Digital Copyright Canada
From: russell_-at-_flora.ottawa.on.ca
Date: 3 Feb 1999 13:03:56 -0500
I am going to crosspost a message I added to the Linuxtoday article. http://linuxtoday.com/stories/2754.html I understand RMS's postings because I'm in the same mindset and reject the concept of 'information ownership'. Secrecy and privacy are concepts that make sence in the context of information, but the 'physical object' style of ownership discussed in 'Intellectual property' just does not. ---cut--- It's interesting to note that this thread takes it's normal sidetrack. There are those of us that are in a Free Software mindset, and those that just use Free Software but have a belief system that is stuck in the "Industrial Era" thinking of the propriatary world. One basic question exists: Do you believe that Information has "physical object like qualities" that enables it to be "owned"? Do you believe that if you came up with an idea (Whether you were first or not, etc), then you should have the ability to restrict access to that idea like one can restrict access to a physical object (Even if someone comes up with the idea independantly, a concept that doesn't exist for physical objects that cannot exist in two spaces at the same time). If you believe ideas can/should be ownable, then you are *NOT* a Free Software person. You might be an 'Open Source' person or might be a Freeloader, but you aren't a Free Software person. If you aren't a Free Software person, then RMS's ideas aren't going to make sence. If you are, then you are going to feel like his postings are redundant as they re-state the obvious. Of the replies, I think it was "X" that wrote the most correct statement: That the timing might be off. It may be we need to have more of the Open Source and Propriatary people (Those who believe in physical-like properties for information) recognize the benifits of information sharing before moving on to the next step. Then again, the eventual goal of the Free Software movement is to totally erradicate the concept of Information Ownership, and reminding people of this from time to time might be useful or it might be the Free Software people who might end up being converted to the 'dark side'. P.S. Thanks for this posting. It started up this common thread in a local Community-Computing discussion group that I am now pointing some local Highschool students to. --- Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <http://russell.flora.org/work/> Thoughts about India, Business including Netshooter project Happy Republic Day, India/Linux! http://russell.flora.org/india/
| 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).
|