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

Re: Not inherently free, but inherently non-free?

Florian Weimer wrote:

>> 2) None of the proponents of this position came up with good
>> reasons why the freedoms we consider so important for software
>> don't apply to documentation.
> Well, there are many reasons, but you probably won't consider them
> good enough.  Personally, I'm much in favor of the concept of moral
> rights, and think that they still have a place in a free software
> environment.

Like the rights of attribution and non-attribution?  Most "moral rights",
like those, are great and we encourage them for programs too.  They don't
interfere with the DFSG freedoms at all.

The "moral right" to prevent a work from being "damaged" or "desecrated",
etc., is appropriate for one-of-a-kind artworks, but is totally
inappropriate for anything which is infinitely copiable.

There are none so blind as those who will not see.

Reply to: