fyi
-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: Re: [GNU-linux-libre] [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-06-13]: New
version for Parabola Social Contract
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 18:28:29 -0400
From: Julie Marchant <onpon4@riseup.net>
Reply-To: Workgroup for fully free GNU/Linux distributions
<gnu-linux-libre@nongnu.org>
To: gnu-linux-libre@nongnu.org
On 06/13/2016 04:33 PM, Richard Stallman wrote:
The invariant sections in manuals under the GFDL are not part
of the documentation. They are works of opinion. That's what
makes them ethically legitimate, in our view. The documenation is
free, but has to be accompanied with the statement of political
views that support the free software movement.
The only possible way I can imagine this coming up is from reading the
part in the Parabola Social contract about libre culture. You do realize
that libre culture has nothing to do with your views, right? Any work
under the GNU FDL with invariant sections, and that includes all of your
manuals, is non-libre culture. That it is a "work of opinion" is irrelevant.
It's well-known that you are in favor of using copyright to restrict
your "works of opinion" or force people to distribute these works with
your manuals, but many people do not agree with you on this. To be
perfectly frank, I think it is unethical use copyright to prohibit
people from exercising the four freedoms on any work, regardless of that
work's purpose, because these freedoms are a human right. And part of
that is if I distribute the documentation you wrote, I should not be
forced to distribute a different work about your personal beliefs which
I may or may not agree with. Perhaps, if you wanted to distribute a
GFDL-licensed manual that included some neo-Nazi propaganda as an
invariant section, you would find sympathy for those of us who oppose
invariant sections.