Re: [OT] Droit d'auteur vs. free software?
Scripsit email@example.com (Thomas Bushnell, BSG)
> Henning Makholm <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > Did you read the exact wording I posted? It very specifically protects
> > exactly the author's intention. Nothing more.
> What if the author's intention is that anyone do whatever they want
> with the work, and explicitly says "I hereby waive any of my so-called
> moral rights"?
He cannot do that. But his action of releasing the work under a free
license will have the coincidental effect that it becomes impossible
to violate the artistic integrity of the work, because the integrity
consists exactly in the work being free.
> In that case, his heirs can *still* come back and say "no waiver is
The moral rights cannot be waived, but they can become irrelevant,
which is the situation we're taling about here.
> and "your modification of the work makes his artistic
> integrity look bad", and it will be their judgment and the court's
> that controls.
The heirs' judgement controls nothing at all. The court's does, of
course, but the unless the court purposefully misunderstands the
intent of the law and the author's intention  it will of course
rule in favor of the author's explicit wishes.
 In which case every bet is off. But in that case the problems
arise IN SPITE OF to the law, not BEACAUSE of it.
Henning Makholm "... not one has been remembered from the time
when the author studied freshman physics. Quite the
contrary: he merely remembers that such and such is true, and to
explain it he invents a demonstration at the moment it is needed."