[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Debian Day



On Tue, 2005-05-24 at 16:32 +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> I ask you to be cautious. I have recently been introduced to
> "free culture" and found it is usually dressed up with weasel
> words like "reasonable freedom". This means that terms like
> the anti-commercial clauses or unmodifiable political adverts
> are accepted as free culture by some. I hope that debconf5-team
> appreciates why "free culture" should be very modifiable and
> not discriminate against commerce.
> 
> I think Gavin Baker from freeculture.org told me that well
> over half of CC-licensed works are under the "NC" variant.
> At present, no CC licence follows the Debian Free Software
> Guidelines. Although I am hopeful that the team led by Evan
> Prodromu will resolve this, why not ask CC to spend the same
> time working on resolving these problems in some way, before
> letting them advertise on debian's day?

Debconf currently has a very visible list of sponsors who are permitted
to advertise in different ways during both Debian Day and DebConf5. All
of them represent different viewpoints and have different goals. For
example, some of them support software patents, some produce and
distribute non-DFSG-free cultural material, and some promote non-free
software developed by non-open development models as part of their
activities.

Nevertheless, they are permitted to participate. Debian is not by far
the only player in this field, whether it is defined as software
engineering, philosophy, social psychology, art, or culture.

I concur with Andreas. Let's be hospitable and build bridges. Once we
have established some trust at a personal level, we are more likely to
gain mutual understanding of the critical issues. One way of opening
these opportunities is to offer others a chance to speak to us. Only
then can we expect to be allowed to speak to others.

-- 
Fabian Fagerholm <fabbe@paniq.net>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


Reply to: