[libreplanet-discuss] Who should gain control on your speech after your own die ?

[Thomas HARDING]

Hello,

To me, advocacy and activism misses a good licence (~ Free Speech).

I just pointed what misses to Creative Commons regarding activism and 
advocacy (I can be totally wrong on) :

sources, trusted.


No matter what extend you quote, translate, use as sample or basis... 
even half a sentence can be harmful (and especially half one over-cutted).


So, the most important condition to endorse derivatives by licence would 
be (need improvements) :

* to point a meta-file buid (eg, build on RDF) and its own signatures 
(at least 2  algorithms).

* Signature combination and RDF file preffered location would be encoded 
in an URN, together with other elements.

* RDF file would point current author electronic signature,  endorsed 
--- SOURCE transcriptions --- (such as a text file, audio file, video 
file...) and their own signatures (/for each/, dual), and "who, when, 
why, ...".

* ... ?

* Making an obligation to publish source "file pointer" together, and 
its signatures.


I just think of how the bible has endorsed twelve twisted reports, 
spreeds twisted translation of the whole (I especially like the 
Chouraki's one in French, where content is entirely different from 
"traditional" ones).

Giving words and let them be your property or an organisation property 
is to settle them, let reuse them but ensure what you said originally is 
the best way to avoid dogmatic thinks.

Even a plumber, there should be no way to control how your speech is 
spread, and nobody should have control except humanity as a whole.


But once again, what you can ensure as a source is what you said :-)




--
Je suis née pour partager : non la haine, mais l'amour.
                                            Sophocle,
                           "Antigone" --- 442 Av. JC.
Two Steps From Heaven: Universal answer is Fortitude.