[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: Aaron Wolf
Subject: Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Fwd: The FSF Allows No Derivatives]
Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 07:24:14 -0700
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0


I don't think your reply helps the cause for promoting free culture here.

Yoni's argument about "computers are all the same and people are
different" may be technically untrue, but the reason it is a bad
argument is because even if it *were* true, it is not a basis for
supporting ND. Derivative works don't deny the original author's
original work. Yoni's conclusion doesn't follow even *if* his premise
were true, so in this case, it doesn't help to attack the premise
because that tacitly accepts the logic of the argument.

Also, the evolution of language and Shakespeare etc. is a false argument
because, while it is a long time, 70 years after author's death is not
enough time for language to evolve that greatly. It does make older
works have a different character, but not the extreme level you were
implying. We still, in principle, have a time when all works will be
public domain.

On 05/27/2015 03:58 AM, Logan Streondj wrote:
> On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 07:09:50PM -0400, Yoni Rabkin wrote:
>>     Software runs the same on every equivalent computer. Computers are
>> not unique; 
> I have to disagree with you there,  computers are in fact
> unique, as unique as any physical thing, you will never find a
> rock that is idential to another rock, nor a computer that is
> idential to another one.  At the very least, the MAC address is
> different, but in detail, the contents of each chip is also
> different, since with the fine-grained architectures nowadays
> there are various fail-safes since it's expected there will be
> some failures in each chip, so they are re-routed in various
> ways.
> on top of that, there are different instruction-set
> architectures, drivers, appendages.  
>> one loaded with the same software is as good as
>> another. 
>> This isn't true of people because people are unique. 
> Just because a lot of computers have the same "belief system",
> i.e. Linux,  doesn't mean they are the same. that would be like
> saying "all christian people are the same", disregarding that
> there are many distributions/denominations, and that each
> person/computer has their own packages and idiosynchrasy.
> also same exact software on a different computer, can still give
> you different results, because of speed, drivers, dust, etc. 
>> These
>> unique personal opinions of people matter and deserve to be heard and
>> preserved as a unique representation of an unique individual; a human
>> voice. To reflect this, I will be moving my personal blog from CC-BY-SA
>> to a BY-ND license, namely:
>> []
> well I guess self-neutering is a personal choice.
> if it has an ND license then it can only be heard for a short
> period of time, the time frame in which people still speak that
> particular dialect,  after that only learnde scholarans, that
> specialize in archaic forms of speech would be able to read it,
> such as those that fluently read chaucer or even shakespeare in 
> the original.

Aaron Wolf
music teacher,

reply via email to

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