[post from Kendall Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
------- Forwarded Message
From: Kendall Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2000 10:11:31 -0600 (CST)
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: RFC: copyleft license
X-Mailer: VM 6.72 under 21.0 "20 minutes to Nikko" XEmacs Lucid
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>> "Michael" == Michael Stutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Michael> Paul Winkler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Michael Stutz wrote:
>> I've looked at the Open Publication license and so far I like
>> this new one of yours best, though I'm not sure about the name
>> ("Design Science License?" Why that, pray tell?)
Michael> As for why the name: "Design Science" is "the art and
Michael> science of doing more with less to ensure the best
Michael> possible outcomes for humans in Universe"; it's what had
Michael> originally attracted me to the free software movement and
Michael> to copyleft -- the idea that people can cooperate and
Michael> communicate honestly and effectively regardless of
Michael> obsolete sovereign laws like copyright.
Am I the only person who thinks this is basically antithetical with
the corporatization of free software? The persistent and
propagandistic misuse of words like 'community' by corporations is
especially perturbing and detrimental.
Sorry, I just gave an interview to Canadian Broadcasting Corp. re:
corporatization of free software, so I'm still tilting at those
windmills, even where they may not exist. :>
I want to see the ideals behind free software spread to thinks like
government, law, urban planning, etc. etc. But I fear that instead
those ideals are everywhere under attack by corporations, either under
attack or being abandoned.
Best,
Kendall Clark
- --
Honesty subverts!
------- End of Forwarded Message
