Brent Saner on 26 Oct 2007 02:18:47 -0000


[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [PLUG] Free Software

  • From: "Brent Saner" <brent.saner@gmail.com>
  • To: "Philadelphia Linux User's Group Discussion List" <plug@lists.phillylinux.org>
  • Subject: Re: [PLUG] Free Software
  • Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 22:18:38 -0400
  • Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; bh=riS4O6jiiod5ZwdqCdpMo4yD6daFB+HcStBI6NmmtTE=; b=a/2ZZ90HWhJNftc9CntelZoGym3eEf3XviavUBPjyUyEoRFJsfx+qkGiV+lERDNKXRqHYYOcVJ2DoET0aEregOwveqA+Sz+4NmselA9coiS+puKa0yv2OzP8BZJfVSBPOiNmRNEaARN6vIG3hiHkLqWT5bpgylWn4LmmbaM+fXI=
  • Reply-to: Philadelphia Linux User's Group Discussion List <plug@lists.phillylinux.org>
  • Sender: plug-bounces@lists.phillylinux.org
On 10/25/07, Matthew Rosewarne <mrosewarne@inoutbox.com> wrote:
On Thursday 25 October 2007, Sean C. Sheridan wrote:
> Many people may not understand that you may charge for your software and
> still have it fall under the category of "free software".  If, however,
> you do not offer the sourcecode your software is not free.  Futhermore the
> foundation promotes copyleft, as opposed to copyright.

It's not actually enough to provide your source code, since your copyrights
still apply to it.  What makes software Free is a license that explicitly
grants (at least) the four kinds of freedom to whom you provide your work.
It's also important to note that "copyleft" is just a playful term for using
copyright in an unusual way, not an opposition to copyright.


correct. the real opposition to copyright is the "Anti-Copyright" or, simply, "A! ©" (also written as No Copyright, N©!)
the only people i've seen use this so far is Crimethinc. (www.crimethinc.com) in their literature.

warning: if you think the Creative Commons license is liberal, i'd advise you to stop reading right now and go read some Dickens or so forth.
it gets vulgar in 5 seconds, 4, 3....

it is the only true antithesis-to-copyright i've seen. the terms reproduced vary from publication to publication, but it boils down to several main points:

1. we encourage you to copy any and all text herein, especially if to give to someone. even more especially if you do it by illegal, inappropriate, or suspicious means ( i.e. photocopying while at work).
2. we encourage you to plagiarize any and all content in this text without citation, claiming it as your own intellectual property.
3. use as evidence, possession by authoritative figures, et. al. is prohibited and punishable under natural law.
4. "fuck you."

i laugh every time i read their copyright information. it's the exact extreme opposite as the run-of-the-mill copyright info you'd normally find.


but my point in case is that the GPL and copyleft are still forms of copyright, they're licensing applied OVER TOP OF the copyright.


--
Brent Saner
215.264.0112(cell)
215.362.7696(residence)

http://www.thenotebookarmy.org 
___________________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group         --        http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion  --   http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug