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

Re: Proposed: Debian's Five Freedoms for Free Works

On Sat, 2003-06-14 at 06:15, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 13, 2003 at 09:15:26AM -0400, Jeremy Hankins wrote:
> > Branden Robinson <branden@debian.org> writes:
> > 
> > > I personally have advocated a fifth freedom:
> > >
> > > 5) The freedom to retain privacy in one's person, effects, and data,
> > >    including, but not limited to, all Works in one's possession and
> > >    one's own changes to Works written by others.
> > 
> > I think (though I'm not sure) that I agree with what you're trying to
> > do, but I don't like using privacy as its basis[1].  Reasonable people
> > can disagree, of course, but I think it's important to understand that
> > privacy and the free flow of information are competing values, and the
> > optimum is some point between either extreme that maximizes other
> > social values.
> I don't find your observation objectionable; I have been wrestling with
> a sound philosophical basis for my "instinctive" feelings on this
> subject.
> As long as the goal is met, I'm not particularly enamored of grounding
> freedom 5 on the concept of privacy.  It probably shouldn't be grounded
> explicitly on *any* political principle, since people can have differing
> value systems, yet agree on this particular point.

Branden, perhaps the term "information disclosure" would better suit
you/us than "privacy"? That is we propose a DFSG-free licence cannot
mandate information disclosure of anything but the information forming a
distributed and derived work.

I agree with Jeremy that I don't like using the idea of privacy as a
basis for the freedom. Not accepting licences that require mandatory
information disclosure seems much more concrete and exactly encompass
the consequences you set out in your initial post.


Reply to: