Comments on: First Monday gets Free Software movement wrong. http://www.digitalcitizen.info/2006/09/26/first-monday-gets-free-software-movement-wrong/ Free Software movement news and related interests. Thu, 13 Oct 2011 06:13:01 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Crosbie Fitch http://www.digitalcitizen.info/2006/09/26/first-monday-gets-free-software-movement-wrong/comment-page-1/#comment-35 Crosbie Fitch Fri, 29 Sep 2006 11:46:12 +0000 http://www.digitalcitizen.info/2006/09/26/first-monday-gets-free-software-movement-wrong/#comment-35 The restraint of the public's freedom is a direct result of unethical economic meddling, e.g. a temporary restriction of people's freedom being used to provide an economic incentive. The power to restore this freedom is of course in the government's power, e.g. to abolish copyright, patents, DMCA, etc. Until that time each artist possesses the unethical power granted to it by the government. Therefore each artist can restore liberty to the public for each work they publish, by providing a contingent license. It is strangely difficult for people to grasp, but if copyright, patents, and the DMCA were abolished tomorrow then no artist would have need of these restraints in order to use the GPL to restore liberty to the public. We are talking about the public's liberty, their freedom to enjoy work that is delivered to them - this is where the term 'published' originated from. To suggest that liberty means the individual should be free to enslave their fellows constitutes grievous semantic harm. The restraint of the public’s freedom is a direct result of unethical economic meddling, e.g. a temporary restriction of people’s freedom being used to provide an economic incentive.

The power to restore this freedom is of course in the government’s power, e.g. to abolish copyright, patents, DMCA, etc.

Until that time each artist possesses the unethical power granted to it by the government.

Therefore each artist can restore liberty to the public for each work they publish, by providing a contingent license.

It is strangely difficult for people to grasp, but if copyright, patents, and the DMCA were abolished tomorrow then no artist would have need of these restraints in order to use the GPL to restore liberty to the public.

We are talking about the public’s liberty, their freedom to enjoy work that is delivered to them – this is where the term ‘published’ originated from.

To suggest that liberty means the individual should be free to enslave their fellows constitutes grievous semantic harm.

]]>