An (as always) excellent post by mason! Especially:
The solution is to fight for the freedoms we don't have, not give up the ones
we do in order to be more consistently oppressed.
The four freedoms aim to control, the best we can, the functional works we do
by ourselves. Nothing more. They are no silver bullet against all "the
terrible things going on in the world" (the mass surveillance, the filter
bubble, Spectre and Meltdown, etc.). As far as I know, nobody pretends that.
In particular, not RMS: http://dcc.ufmg.br/~lcerf/rms_en.webm (a recent
recording of his "A Free Digital Society" talk, at my university, where I
invited him).
By confusing material works and immaterial works, freedom and privacy,
patents and copyright, patents on software and patents on drugs, local
programs and online services, ..., heyjoe cannot properly study any specific
problem. Even less fight against them. He ends up only complaining that the
world is a terrible place. Worse, he apparently blames the four freedom for
not being a perfect solution to all "the terrible things going on in the
world" and therefore considers them moot.
For example, not willing to separately study patents on drugs and on
software, heyjoe writes:
Patents do _not_ prevent invention.
It is certainly true in some area. It may be true for drugs (I do not know).
In the software area, it is definitely wrong.
http://patentabsurdity.com/watch.html (a 29-minute video) and
http://dcc.ufmg.br/~lcerf/wpa.mp3 (a 59-minute investigative-radio report)
are the best mainstream resources on that subject, imho.
The four freedoms do not solve that problem. Software patents prevent
everybody writing software, free or proprietary, from innovating without
risking a law suit. The whole society ultimately pays the cost of software
patentability: a financial cost (going to patent lawyers and to patent
trolls) and a reduced innovation.
