On 11/02/16 07:29 AM, Daniel Pocock wrote: > > > On 11/02/16 13:08, Fabio Pesari wrote: >> I know this is going to be controversial and I understand that the FSF >> is about software and not culture but in truth, I disagree with the >> FSF's (and the GNU project's) usage of nonfree cultural licenses (like >> the CC-BY-ND). >> >> I disagree with the idea that things that express a subjective point of >> view do not have to be free. Some software expresses a subjective POV, >> and most art does: before copyright laws, all works of art, religion and >> science used to be technically free, but that didn't stop people from >> creating them! >> >> The argument that using a free license lets a personal POV get "twisted" >> is faulty, because doing that is libellous (a crime) and I don't see >> anybody putting words in the mouths of Leo Tolstoy, Leonardo da Vinci >> and H.P. Lovecraft (all authors whose works are in the public domain). >> Attribution is not defamation! >> > > > It is not just about defamation > > People may actively work on something (e.g. a paper or some slides) to > promote a particular point of view (e.g. Free Software) > > Somebody else may take 90% of the slides and just change 10% of them and > start using them to promote a similar point of view (e.g. Open Source) > > Is the FSF using nonfree licenses as a tactic to prevent that? >
If this is the rationale, it always struck me as either really ill-advised, or an abuse/misunderstanding of copyright. Copyright can't do what's described above. Fair use, parody allowances, etc., could still make many objectionable things from a software freedom perspective possible from a free speech perspective. In the area of works of opinion, the notion that copyright should be used to restrict expression we don't agree with is an abuse of copyright -- not only do I believe it to be inappropriate, but it's also not very effective. What's required to preserve free speech in the area of opinion is just *proper attribution*. I can't stop people from saying what they want, but they shouldn't be able to pretend that I said something I didn't.
