Re: [gNewSense-users] gNewSense a only for software libre? Not requiring free cultural works with software?

[Bruno]

Olá!

Sorry to come back on this thread so late.
I feel now I was quite rude in my ways and I'd like to apologise for
that, I certainly did not mean to ofend. (..and, in fact, don't even
know why gNS artwork is nonfree..) :(

My most sincere apologies if I hurted anyone's feelings.

Also want to thankyou for all other comments and replies, did left me
thinking.. learning.. and maybe a bit change in opinion..

Gratefull for that. 

This law division of material/non material stuff was unknown to me.
In my language(potuguese) it's allways 'author rights' that people refer
to, so it's always a question of authorship protection that people are
speaking of, and this seems legitimate.
I guess here is the 'trap', even in a cientific work is fair to protect
authorship, like the signature on a painting, it's harmless.

If knowlage can be the tool and basis for autonomy of populations, on
the other hand, it's control and supression has been the tool for
tirany, most times and places.

I stil don't think an artist holding copyrights for his own work would
give him so much power over others as to become a social danger, it
could however become a problem for him to get more public, I guess.

On the other hand, it is already a very dangerous social problem the
companies holding and acumulating copy rights for artworks of enumerous
artists even long after they die, this way these 'proprietaries' already
have gained very much power over both artists and the public, owning
ones and controling the others.

The general public sees 'the artists' has rich people, leading 'easy'
lifes of 'glamour', and this is only true for very few of the very
famous ones, and yes, only possible due to patents.
So then, almost all artists will strongly object to 'no patents' with
the idea that copyrights is their only authorship protection, payment
warranty, and eventual possibility for future better economic situation.

I think it's 'traps' allover, and why we get more and more 'cultura£
product' and less Art.

I feel that if I simply say -freedom for everything- I fall into another
trap, like the 'anarchy' word went to meaning chaos, wich does not.

I see the free software movement more about individual and comunitary
autonomy and social ethics (like true original anarchism) than just
freedom.
Both anarchy and freedom I am in favor, but both become ilusions,
because there are always hierachies and limitations.
Of course, hierarchies don't need to be repressive and some don't need
to exist, and many limitations people can overcome if they have freedom
to be creative and try diferent. So, it might be that both hierarchy and
limitations would turn out to be very good things.. amongst autonumous,
ethic, nonrepressive comunities/societies, wich is the utopia(=place not
yet found).

Off all people I know, some say-"oh, linux!".. but most not even that.
When I explain -'cientific knowlage/autonomy/comunity/like growing
crops/public domain/private is bad'- they say -"oh, yes, right, thats
true"
If/when word hacker comes, artwork copyrights comes and it's end of
subject, with artists it's quite radical -"that's just stealing and
ruining peoples work, no no no!! How would we eat then?! no no"
Even if then they all 'confess' to also get copies from 'hakced'
material -"but if I had money, I'd prefer de original, bláblá.."
Also, and more important, even if then they confess that it is the shows
that pays, not the copyrights.

I'm feeling the artists in general are feeling 'atacked' by the hackers
by 'traps' of missunderstanding, when in fact an artist works just like
a hacker, studying and modifying existing works and technics, and mostly
the same kind of values, in essence are seeked.
And in fact the commun 'enenmy' are the same 'proprietaries'.

Thanks for your time.
Apologies for my earlier agressive, rude ways.. (me newbie, even to
writing mails) ..not intended.. :(
Much respect for all here.
..and..
ThankYou SO much all developers!!

Bruno