[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [GNU-linux-libre] [libreplanet-discuss] Fwd: Re: [Dev] [consensus][d

From: Adonay Felipe Nogueira
Subject: Re: [GNU-linux-libre] [libreplanet-discuss] Fwd: Re: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-06-13]: New version for Parabola Social Contract
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2016 10:58:22 -0300

Note: The e-mail for which I'm replying wasn't copied to RMS, so in case
of doubt, I'm making sure that my reply reflects part of the arguments
of the parent e-mail.

Unless I'm really blind right know (which happens some times), I can't
see how the requirements of the Definition of Free Cultural Works are
present in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The UDHR seems to mention the freedom to redistribute exact copies of
the original works non-commercially only for scientific advancement and
its benefits, but doesn't guarantee other freedoms, and seems to
restrict the freedom to redistribute exact copies of the original work.

So, onpon4's statement against the free software movement's position on
non-functional data doesn't seem to be convincing right now.

as an alternative interpretation, I guess onpon4 is mistaking the
positions of the free software activists in general. He/she seems to
think that we call ourselves free culture activists (this is done only
by misinformed people). We don't do so. But we don't oppose free culture
activists. We just believe that there are other priorities in place, and
that when free culture turns out to be a priority in scenarios where our
other priorities aren't resolved, things tend to get out of focus, as I
have already pointed out to all of you.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]