I've been suggesting for a long time that the ideal vision we should at least have rhetorically (not practically) is the abolition of copyright and patent laws combined with mandatory source-release for published works and prohibition of DRM.
On 03/08/2015 10:55 AM, James Dabgotra wrote: > I think what was being suggested is copyleft encourages developers to forgo > their "right" to put software under a proprietary license. But copyleft isn't > mandatory. Besides, that "freedom" to put it under that license is the > freedom > to potentially exercise power over others. Vis-a-vis JS Mill, you should be > free to do whatever you want if it does not hinder the well-being and freedom > of others. But copyright is often meant to do that -- its you being free to > exercise power over others. Given that, an argument can be made that making > copyleft mandatory and outlawing proprietary software (paternalistically) > could maximize freedom. > > On Sunday, March 08, 2015 12:01:30 AM Giuseppe Molica wrote: >>> [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider ]]] >>> [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]] >>> [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]] >>> >>> Copyleft is not a restriction. It is a defense against restrictions >>> imposed by middlemen on the users. >> >> I totally agree with Stallman. Copyleft is, actually, the best defense >> that FREE users have. >
