On Sat, 10 Jan 2015 01:45:24 +0100 rysiek <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > While I admire RMS for his free software work, I have my own > > > differences with him. For example his stance on Creative Commons > > > -ND provision: http://onpon4.github.io/other/fsf-no-derivatives/ > > > http://rys.io/en/101 > > > > Yet another instance of Stallman's lack of consistency. > > I find him very consistent as long as we stay in the software > ballpark; as soon as we leave it, especially if we venture into other > copyrighted works territory, there are things that indeed seem > inconsistent. I wasn't referring to copyright legalese anyway. I was talking about serious stuff like constantly invoking freedom while being a crass statist. > > What I found slightly interesting, and correct me if I'm > > wrong, is that one of Stallman's basic arguments for free software > > is that individuals have the right to use their hardware however > > they wish, but running propietary software means that > > somebody else is controlling or 'owning' their hardware. > > I would say: that individuals should have the right to use their > *tools* however they like, including fixing them, modifying them and > helping their neighbours by lending them. Which boils down to : this is my stuff - I do with it whatever I want. > > > That is a rather libertarian/propertarian argument. > > Well, as far as I read it, it's not about *ownership*, but rather > *control*. But I guess to some extent you can't have one without the > other. > >
