Re: Results for Debian's Position on the GFDL
Raul Miller <moth.debian@gmail.com>
> On 3/27/06, MJ Ray <mjr@phonecoop.coop> wrote:
> > Those ludicrous conclusions do not follow logically from the claim,
> > for such reasons as simple plane carriage not being a technical
> > measure under the relevant definitions presented here so far.
>
> Which definitions would those be?
For example,
the expression "technological measures" means any technology, device or
component that, in the normal course of its operation, is designed to
prevent or restrict acts, in respect of works or other subject-matter,
which are not authorised by the rightholder of any copyright or any
right related to copyright as provided for by law or the sui generis
right provided for in Chapter III of Directive 96/9/EC.
[EUCD (2001/29/EC) Article 6 (3)]
> Can we agree that the FDL prohibits people who make copies from
> obstructing other people from reading copies?
No. The FDL prohibits some types of copying, not people.
> I'm going to assume our problem here has to do with the definition
> of "technical measures" that you're using. Somehow, you've excluded
> "power switch" as a relevant technical measure, where I see no
> reason to make such an exclusion. From my point of view your
> response here makes no sense, because you're drawing what looks
> to me like non-distinctions.
I won't accept a claim that a power switch is designed to prevent
or restrict acts, in respect of works or other subject-matter,
which are not authorised by the rightholder(s) - that is, that a
power switch is a "technical measure" in the FDL.
[...]
> Here's the definitions of "Technical measures" which I consider plausible:
>
> 1) "Technical measures" are "measures which, by law, the user is not allowed
> to bypass them, and which are specifically intended to enforce copyrights."
Who are you quoting here? That's ungrammatical.
> 2) "Technical measures" are anything which fits the usual english meanings
> of these words:
> http://www.answers.com/technical
> http://www.answers.com/measures
I don't believe that's the sense in the FDL. If it were, far more
things would be restricted. I think FDL uses an EUCD-like meaning.
Either way, using that definition still leads one to conclude
the FDL is not usable for free software. If you wish to argue
for that definition, you are arguing even more strongly than I
am that FDL is unsuitable for main! Hence, I cannot understand
your support for FDL on this topic.
Hope that explains,
--
MJR/slef
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct
Reply to: