[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Fwd: The FSF Allows No Derivatives

From: rysiek
Subject: Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Fwd: The FSF Allows No Derivatives
Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 23:03:06 +0200
User-agent: KMail/4.13.3 (Linux/3.13.0-53-generic; KDE/4.13.3; x86_64; ; )

Dnia sobota, 16 maja 2015 10:47:44 Will Hill pisze:
> If the context is clear enough the change is transformative, isn't it?

It's not. The problem is with "enough". As always, border cases are where the 
problem lies, and they are not easy to solve.

> We can tell the difference between a propaganda site and a professor making
> class material in good faith or an artist making a painting.  Would anyone
> have a problem with that?

I, for one. As that leaves much to large a field for interpretation, and since 
we're in free speech and civil rights area, this is indeed a problem.

In the 1960', most of what dr King was saying would be treated as "black 
propaganda", for instance. The only solution is to have as clear and 
unequivocal rules and laws, as possible.

Also, I really insist on you answering the question I have asked:
"can you make such a strong distinction between texts that are "works of art"
 and those that are "wokrs of opinion". FSF's stance on -ND hinges on that
 distinction being possible to make."

I do note, however, that in you're statement quoted above you put both a "work 
of art" (painting) and a "work of opinion" (class material) together, as 
opposed to another "work of opinion" (propaganda site). This seems to suggest 
that the distinction should be somewhere else than between "works of opinion" 
and "works of art".

Michał "rysiek" Woźniak

Zmieniam klucz GPG ::
GPG Key Transition ::

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

reply via email to

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