[Discuss] Request for Comments: Digital DIY: Legal Challenges & Solutions Practised Report
blueback09 at gmail.com
Thu Sep 22 07:33:57 UTC 2016
Yeah, copyright doesn't force people to do anything; worst case is it
forbids people from doing things.
And it's weird to rail against copyright from a libre perspective because
copyleft, the legal precedent that allows for free/libre in the first
place, wouldn't exist without copyright.
It's the courts enforcing the terms of copyleft that gives free/libre
power. If you want to get rid of copyright then you'll also lose copyleft.
That's the exact challenge we have in hardware! There isn't any copyright
for hardware (functional objects) so we can't use copyleft to enforce
The absence of copyleft makes a domain open source by default. It's only
with copyleft that free/libre can exist. You have to have the ability to
get a court to issue an injunction against someone that wants to use your
free/libre stuff in violation of the terms that require sharing. Without
the option of getting the courts to side with you there isn't any way to
On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 6:14 PM, Brennen Bearnes <bbearnes at gmail.com> wrote:
> Various parties wrote:
> > > 2. Alert:
> > > Please, please, please, do not call you 3.1. section
> > > "copyright", please, oh please, let stop this, please really
> > > please Wouter, not for a european paper, please please please
> > > Wouter. Please find an other term like "right of authorship",
> > > or "right of intellectual property",
> > NO. the concept of "intelligence as property" is both fake,
> > misleading, and utterly arrogant. how DARE you claim that you can
> > ENSLAVE ME through OWNERSHIP of the intelligence within MY mind
> > that is my BIRTHRIGHT.
> It kind of seems like this rhetorical mode might not be doing us
> any favors.
> -- bpb
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the discuss