You don't *asterisk* need to make a *asterisk* derivative work from nd sources. 
Just write an *asterisk* original work about it.

This is *asterisk* actually what the FSF and GNU ppl want you to do. They do 
*asterisk* not want to be the central source for all things free, either.

Just say it in your own *asterisk* words!

On 05/25/2015 05:18 PM, Aaron Wolf wrote:
> And the ND clause helps this HOW?
>
> I think ND is *hurting* our cause and *increasing* the misrepresentation
> by discouraging some amount of positive derivative works that are
> *aligned* with FSF values.
>
> On 05/24/2015 10:15 PM, Will Hill wrote:
>> I suppose the easiest way to demonstrate the misrepresentation is to ask an 
>> IT 
>> person about the FSF.  If you can't remember your own surprise on first 
>> reading actual GNU and FSF material, you will probably be surprised by the 
>> average IT person's skewed perceptions.  They are likely to tell you some 
>> confused things about "Open Source", "freeware", "hobbiest", etc.  The 
>> general public is even less well informed.  The last thing you might hear is 
>> a clear understanding of the power non free software has over users and what 
>> it takes to undo that.   
>>
>> This problem of misrepresentation is not unique to free software.  Rich and 
>> powerful people devote significant resources to confusing the public about 
>> all sorts of things.  
>>
>> On Friday 22 May 2015, [email protected] wrote:
>>> will hill" easy to observe pattern of publishers missrepresenting GNU
>>> and the FSF by all means at their disposal"
>>


-- 

Attachment: 0xE1A91299.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to