Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 00:08:20 +1000 From: Stephen McKay <mckay@thehub.com.au> To: swear@blarg.net (Gary W. Swearingen) Cc: Stephen McKay <mckay@thehub.com.au>, Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: RMS: A threat to society? Message-ID: <200109191408.f8JE8Ki21552@dungeon.home> In-Reply-To: <ag66ag5vm7.6ag@localhost.localdomain> from Gary W. Swearingen at "18 Sep 2001 09:09:20 -0700" References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010913023437.045fae70@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913002733.05261930@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010912203732.0492cc80@localhost> <20010912225151.58FCD37B40B@hub.freebsd.org> <20010912215547.98067.qmail@web20806.mail.yahoo.com> <01091219512600.11358@proxy.the-i-pa.com> <20010912225428.A9675@citusc17.usc.edu> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913021952.045974f0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913185102.0497c9e0@localhost> <15266.22869.722204.601040@guru.mired.org> <3BA3248D.5E47FDC9@mindspring.com> <200109181401.f8IE14h29150@dungeon.home> <ag66ag5vm7.6ag@localhost.localdomain>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tuesday, 18th September 2001, Gary W. Swearingen wrote: >Stephen McKay <mckay@thehub.com.au> writes: > >> Well, he certainly opposes intellectual property law, loudly and >> frequently. But he doesn't break it, he uses it against people >> who support it. That's "disdain" I suppose, but I think you >> were implying criminality. > >http://www.progressive-comp.com/Lists/?l=berlin-design&m=93118897023514&w=2 > >Read the above post of his to an ML and tell us he doesn't have disdain >for the rule of law (contract law in this case) and for fairness. Is this the right link? This is about CORBA IDL and how since there's only one way to specify any protocol, you can't meaningfully copyright it, and hence the GPL doesn't work on it. He goes on to say you could GPL it anyway for minor FUD value. Is that what you object to? I can't see how you could object to this as it is a standard tactic used by all companies in every contract I've ever seen, and pretty much everywhere else any company as tried to go legal on anybody. Why else does every contract have that bit about still being a valid contract even if part of it is ruled invalid by a court of law? It's not a slap down argument if the worst he has done is tell somebody "What the heck, put a GPL notice on it anyway, and maybe it will have some minor effect along the lines you want". If that's the worst he's done then maybe he's a saint after all! >As for IP law, Stallman clearly embraces the concept, in practice if not >in law. There's a difference between using a thing against its makers, and embracing it. He argues against it, but uses it when he must, since it's the present environment. If he didn't use IP law, then he would be forgoing a weapon in the fight against IP law. I like those sorts of contradictions. :-) >Eliminate IP law and the closed-source developers, supported by >the judicial system, would just revert to contract law, as would Stallman >in his holy war to keep "free" software from being used by closed-source >software developers. You could well be right about that. Except for the "holy war" bit. You should be careful about words like that in today's climate, since they mean very specific things. RMS and his followers feel very strongly about certain things, mostly to do with software. They disagree with the status quo and work actively to change it. They are not involved in a holy war. Not even a bit. Stephen. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200109191408.f8JE8Ki21552>