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

Re: OSD && DFSG - different purposes - constructive suggestion!

Thomas, I'm responding to your questions, but I'm actually directing my
response to Branden Robinson, since I don't know your position on his
DFSG-interpretation proposal.

Branden, if the FSF's four freedoms are the consitution to DFSG's case
law, they have a lot in common with the US constitution, in that they
don't explicitly guarantee a right to privacy.  So, see below.

On Mon, 2003-03-10 at 15:17, Thomas Bushnell-san wrote:
> > That's great, Thomas, but you're missing the point. You can say
> > "it's about privacy, it's about the freedom to keep things private,
> > it's about not fundamental rights" 'til you're blue in the face, and
> > even though every word of it's completely true, it's *not relevant*. We
> > don't guarantee every freedom we can, we guarantee the one's that are
> > important and useful.
> The point is that it is about *freedom*.  You are saying that this
> restriction is ok.  Why then is not a restriction "this software
> cannot be used by bigots" not OK?  Why should we prohibit that
> restriction in free software?

Because the four freedoms do talk about freedom to use the software, but
don't say anthing about the freedom to *not* disclose source code under
certain conditions.

> I'm saying "privacy is an aspect of freedom, and so we should make
> room for it."

Interestingly, neither the FSF's four freedoms, nor FDR's four freedoms
(wink) include privacy. 

-Dave Turner                     Stalk Me: 617 441 0668

"On matters of style, swim with the current, on matters 
of principle, stand like a rock." -Thomas Jefferson

Reply to: