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.