foo_bar_baz_boo-deb@yahoo.com wrote:
--- Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org> wrote:
Are you arguing that the "right" to "see the
author's work as the author intended it to be seen" is more important than that? (I'll pass on the question of whether such a right exists, except to note that I've never heard of such a thing.)I fully agree this sounds crackbrained and radical.
Not at all. As I read the FSF and Stallman's position on the matter, that's what intended. To me what seems crackbrained and radical is this notion that everything in Debian is "software" and must therefore be under a free software license. I find it a scary concept that such dogmatic thinking may be in control of Debian, if for no other reason than it guarantees endless religious flamewars, and no sarge in the foreseable future. :-)
It does not have
precedent in the field of free software, but my thinking here is not totally original either, there is some basis for it in other fields.
Absolutely. Preserving a document as it's intended to be seen by others is a matter of freedom for both author *and* reader.