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

Re: documentation eq software ?

Mathieu Roy <yeupou@gnu.org> writes:
> Jeremy Hankins <nowan@nowan.org> a tapoté :

>> You're not the only one to have this misconception, so I want to
>> emphasize this point.
>> The only way you can write your own text based on the old one is if
>> the license permits you to do so.  Typically with books that means
>> the work is in the public domain or you've got explicit permission
>> from the author.
> I'm completely capable to read a book and make a summary, make a
> speech about it ... there's no way to forbid that -

Sure.  Copyright does not control ideas.  I'm with you so far.

> since I have the
> freedom of speech and freedom of thought.

This is the wrong reason for what you stated above.  Take a look at
trade secrets or patents, for example, which do seek to control ideas.

> Every scientific book is made of references, bibliographies. You do
> not remodify a book someone wrote - that's pointless.

Which is it?  Pointless or impossible?  Let's try to maintain as much
clarity as we can here.

If your argument is that it's pointless my response is that that's not
my call -- nor is it yours.  The whole point of freedom is that people
have a chance to decide that sort of thing for themselves.  I can come
up with some scenarios if you really want me to try.[1]  But whether
my scenarios are convincing or not isn't relevant because I never
claimed to be able to predict every use someone might have for
something.  As far as I know, neither have you.  This really isn't
something I'd expect to have to argue in a Free Software context, so
I'm not sure how much detail you need.

If you're saying it's impossible, I say again, that depends on the
license.  And that, really, is my main point here.  I certainly don't
want to rehash the same tired arguments in favor of invariant text
that we've heard time after time -- as often as arguments for
proprietary software as for proprietary text.

[1] Think about the Brothers Grimm fairy tails, for example.  If the
    only version we had today were the originals the world would be
    without a lot of kids books.  If you're not familiar with them,
    the originals are much darker and more violent than what most
    modern parents would want their kids reading today.

Jeremy Hankins <nowan@nowan.org>
PGP fingerprint: 748F 4D16 538E 75D6 8333  9E10 D212 B5ED 37D0 0A03

Reply to: