On 5/20/08, Kurt H Maier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> (eg. allowing to kill is more free by your definition (less >> restrictions), but if we care about consequences then it's less free >> (it may pose much more restrictions on the possibilities of an >> individual)) > > This is a specious analogy. When you kill someone you permanently > remove them from the population. Compiling a binary and releasing it > without providing source does not remove the source code from the > public grasp.
you missed my point the analogy is to show that removing a restriction may cause more restriction globally in some way (which also shows the flaw in your interpretation of freedom) i thougth this was trivial, but here is a less abstract analogy: - remove restriction 'copyright notice should be included' - one can sell dwm, with different copyright notice - he may restrict * (include some evil, anti-freedom restrictrions here) - ppl won't know about original source because it's not named, so they will face evil restrictions - restrictions == less freedom - so removing restriction might mean less freedom > There is in fact near-universal agreement on the exact meaning of the > term. You, and certain members and employees of the FSF, have > deviated from that meaning. This doesn't make the original meaning > less valid; nor does it make your revised edition more valid. You're i talked about freedom more generally (not just software freedom) when defining the term "freedom provided by a ruleset" the "level of inclusion of consequences" is an inherent problem. it has nothing to do with FSF. > it to describe a copyright license that imposes restrictions on > people, it's a clear case of obfuscating reality for political > purposes, and it's disingenuous. It's also not a very good way to get > people on your side. i think it's a matter of terminology but even regarding it as philosophical question it should have nothing to do with "politics" or "one's side" > Personally, I'd like to see copyright law abolished entirely. The > entire concept of licensing is distasteful to me, but that's the world > we live in. i agree. it would be nice if every code were in public domain so noone should care about licensing.
