On Mon, 2010-09-13 at 15:21 +0200, Carsten Agger wrote: > man, 13 09 2010 kl. 13:54 +0100, skrev Alex Hudson: > > If we take that argument at face value, what we're saying is that for > > any Government website (as an example), people should have the right to > > run a modified version of it for their commercial purposes that have > > nothing to do with the Government data. It would be interesting to see > > the construction of an argument that those freedoms are necessary for > > good governance. > > No. A website is a service that is provided but runs on the Government's > server. > [snip] > And to pass the changes on to partners who need e.g. the same error > corrections. That's two of the freedoms already.
You're pretty much entirely missing the point. If we're saying that software freedom is not just a nice-to-have at Government level, but an actual necessity required for good governance, then the example I set out must be defensible - there has to be a good reason why that *must* be the case. If it isn't, then at best only a subset of the freedoms are required. Showing how freedoms can benefit Govt. is easy, but that's not the question. Cheers Alex. -- This message was scanned by Better Hosted and is believed to be clean. http://www.betterhosted.com _______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list [email protected] https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
