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

Re: A possible GFDL compromise

On Mon, 25 Aug 2003, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:

>On Monday, Aug 25, 2003, at 10:44 US/Eastern, Fedor Zuev wrote:

>> 	So, there is no censorship in the world as long as no one
>> threaten to kill you? Well.

>That's not what I said, and even if it were, there are other forms
>of coercion, intimidation, etc. besides death threats.

	Yes, you said also many other things. All of them equally
miss the point.

	Censorship is not about power. Censorship is about flow of
information. There are just two points in this flow, where
intentional (not as side effect of other considerations) efforts
(not including no-doing) to remove "inapropriate texts" can be
qualified otherwise:  begin (author), and end (reader, user). All
other should be considered censorship.

>[And there is a big difference between censoring a person and
>censoring a copy of a document, btw.]

	You can't censoring a person, even if you will have enough
power. You can only censoring  his works, speeches, documents.

	I, as user of Debian, do not want to audit each and every
package to be aware if package mantainer delete some essential
document he finds "inappropriate" for his beliefs. If manual author
is a honoured chairman of KKK - I want to know about this. If author
is activist of "legalize marijuana" movement - I also want to know
about this (and, in latter case, I will avoid to use his program in
mission-critical applications, and will take his statement in manual
with grain of salt).

>>> [0] Just like cutting the philosophical sections from a manual.
>> 	No. Not like.

>Care to explain how?

>> 	Please note, that you do not need a special license from me
>> to include (or even not include) portion of my post in your. But for
>> manual you expect explicit permission.

>Not at all. I can include portions of (or, if needed, the whole)
>manual for similar purposes in a document I write, at least in the
>US. We call it "fair use."

	Yes. For quoting manual you also do not need explicit
permission. Therefore you do not need to include invariant sections
as long as all what you need is a fair quoting, like in this case.
You bound to include invariant sections if and only if you want to
do things, which is _not_ like quoting, not like fair use.

Reply to: