Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
On Tue, 12 Aug 2003, Branden Robinson wrote:
BR>Establish first that the debian-legal team's current application
BR>of the term "software" to all binary digits that get shipped in
BR>Debian main is fallacious even if valid.
Not to say for everyone, but for me there is a very strong
reason.
Because "everyting is software" declarations does not really
serve for promotion of any freedom, but, contrary, only for stealing
freedom existed under the law.
There are several slightly different legal regimes existed
under common term "copyright". Literary copyright, music
copyright, graphic works copyright, audiovisual (motion pictures)
copyright and harshest among them, software copyright.
Of course, there is some differences between countries, but
they are relatively small regarding this subject. Under software
copyright user get far more restrictions and far less rights than
under any other flavor of copyright. So, assumption (popular here,
in debian-legal, AFAIK) that user has virtually no rigths exept
those explicitly granted by license, is almost exact for software.
For example here, in Russia, I can make for personal
non-commercial purposes copies of any copyrighted work with one
exeption: computer software.
In USA (and most of EU countries) you can legally rent copy
of any copyrighted book - but not a copy of computer program.
And so on...
And declaration of Someone "Let`s call everything 'software'
- it will help us to promote freedom in Debian ISO images" in
reality look like:
* Someone steal from me the freedom (freedom at the some
extent, but the most valuable extent) to use _any_ work.
* Then, after the theft, Someone _argue_ for the use
for _some_ (maybe better to say: "several") works the Free Licences,
which grant me back a freedom to use _this_ work, and give small
additional freedom (almost useless for non-developers).
No, thanks. I do not need such "freedom". It will lead me
direct to a jail, after all.
Reply to: