Re: Question about GR-2006-004
On Sun, 08 Oct 2006, Francesco Poli wrote:
> On Sat, 7 Oct 2006 23:04:21 -0700 Don Armstrong wrote:
> > Thus, the proposal very carefully walks the line that the DFSG
> > currently walks. Whether the DFSG should apply to all works (or
> > just some work) is an open question, and one that I believe should
> > be discussed at length.
>
> I'm not very happy that the GR reaffirms this interpretation of the
> scope of DFSG#2. I think that maybe it would be much more useful if
> the issue of sourceless non-programmatic works were kept out of
> GR-2006-004 (that is to say, if the text of the GR didn't have item
> B.).
This part of the GR merely restates what is current practice,
advancing a literal interpretation of what DFSG 2 clearly requires.
While I think the availability of source even for non-programmatic
works is important, the DFSG does not clearly and unambiguously
require them. This is why the resolution strongly recommends them, but
does not require them.
> What seems awkward to me is that there are other sentences in the DFSG
> that speak about programs, rather than works.
Sure; the DFSG is unfortunatly worded rather inelegantly in those
cases. It was long intended to also amend the DFSG after 2004_003 to
resolve these unfortunate ambiguities, but the outfall from that
decision (and the subsequent retirement of the drafter) have basically
shelved those changes. The GR as drafted is limited only to the
interpretation of section 2 (ignoring point D, which is disparate) so
any effect upon other sections is purely in the mind of the reader.
> P.S.: Please go on Cc:ing me, as I am not a subscriber. Thanks.
It would make my life easier if you would preserve the
Mail-Followup-To: then.
Don Armstrong
--
Miracles had become relative common-places since the advent of
entheogens; it now took very unusual circumstances to attract public
attention to sightings of supernatural entities. The latest miracle
had raised the ante on the supernatural: the Virgin Mary had
manifested herself to two children, a dog, and a Public Telepresence
Point.
-- Bruce Sterling, _Holy Fire_ p228
http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu
Reply to: