Puppy Linux Discussion Forum Forum Index Puppy Linux Discussion Forum
Puppy HOME page : puppylinux.com
"THE" alternative forum : puppylinux.info
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

The time now is Mon 10 Dec 2018, 16:21
All times are UTC - 4
 Forum index » Taking the Puppy out for a walk » Suggestions
Stop using the GPL
Moderators: Flash, Ian, JohnMurga
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
Page 3 of 4 [51 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next
Author Message
rufwoof

Joined: 24 Feb 2014
Posts: 2706

PostPosted: Wed 14 Nov 2018, 20:47    Post subject:  

OpenBSD licence is nice and simple ...

https://cvsweb.openbsd.org/src/share/misc/license.template?rev=HEAD

Basically says "here's the source code ... do whatever you like with it, but if you have problems - it's your problem". So you can even take BSD'd code and turn it into a proprietary application if you so wish.

_________________
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) :wq
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
musher0

Joined: 04 Jan 2009
Posts: 13147
Location: Gatineau (Qc), Canada

PostPosted: Thu 15 Nov 2018, 09:50    Post subject:  

Hello all.

Their disclaimer part is better written, clearer (IMO), more detailed, than
that of the other licenses.

(Please cover your kids' ears for the next sentence:)
But to me, that OpenBSD license is sort of a "You can even use this
software as toilet paper if you wish" license...

Very subjective, but I don't like it.

~~~~~~~~~
Edit, 5 minutes later:

Come to think of it, are you automatically hung high and dry if you use
GPL'd software on OpenBSD?

BFN.

_________________
musher0
~~~~~~~~~~
Je suis né pour aimer et non pas pour haïr. (Sophocle) /
I was born to love and not to hate. (Sophocles)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
nosystemdthanks

Joined: 03 May 2018
Posts: 540

PostPosted: Thu 15 Nov 2018, 22:49    Post subject:  

musher0 wrote:
But to me, that OpenBSD license is sort of a "You can even use this
software as toilet paper if you wish" license...


actually all free software can be used as toilet paper, whether under the gpl license or not. for two reasons:

freedom 0 is "the freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose." this includes printing it out and using it as toilet paper.

all free software licenses, whether copyleft or permissive, allow this. since flushing it down the toilet doesnt count as conveying the work, gpl 3 restrictions are not even triggered by using it as toilet paper, but wouldnt apply if they were.

permissive licenses also allow you to use the work as toilet paper, provided that you include the proper copyright notice.

version 2 of the gpl might raise some issues if authors use the kill switch, but that could also possibly be said for any free software license lacking a no-revocation clause. if you are concerned about that possibility, you are free to use cc0 works as toilet paper and avoid even these extremely hypothetical scenarios.

of course open source will tell you that companies find permissive licenses to be softer on the skin, while free software advocates will tell you its more important to preserve your right to use the bathroom and have all the source code needed to use, study, change and share your toilet.

personally i think eulas are better for toilet paper, but to each his own.

the question you should be asking is-- if you use agpl-licensed software as toilet paper, are you then required to upload a stool sample to a public server?

if so, then what instructions should it include for compiling, and is stool considered a binary or do you have to upload copies of the same things you ate as the source code for the changes you made?

these are probably also unfounded concerns however, as flushing it down the toilet is not considered conveying the work, nor is it considered running it from a server.

Quote:
Come to think of it, are you automatically hung high and dry if you use
GPL'd software on OpenBSD?


no, the bsd community uses tar and feathers-- as long as it is a version of tar that is under a permissive license and compiled with clang instead of gcc.

i dont really begrudge this aspect of the bsd community. i think of their love of permissive licensing as more of a backup plan/alternative than a plot to destroy everything that free software works for.

an exception to all this is whether americans can use software from their phones as toilet paper. under the dmca, unlocking your phone to get the software from it directly could trigger the anti-circumvention clause, which means that if there is a year where there is not a specific exception made, you may need to ask the librarian of congress for permission to wipe. you can thank bill clinton for that-- it was his administration that passed the dmca.

hollywood frequently lobbies canadas government to import this nonsense, so check your own laws before you assume they are different. i note with pleasure that so far-- i am unaware of hollywood succeeding at passing bills like that. but i certainly dont trust trudeau with this.

this is not a snipe at canada, and i wish you all the best in this regard. there is absolutely no reason that hollywood should be given the opportunity to control anything outside of california. they are some of the worlds worst legislators, and they are perfectly welcome to find another planet to bother instead at any time they wish to do so.

i am not a lawyer or proctologist, and this does not constitute legal advice or medical advice.

_________________
the end of the distro war, and the distro https://ptpb.pw/OnBT
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
rufwoof

Joined: 24 Feb 2014
Posts: 2706

PostPosted: Thu 15 Nov 2018, 23:30    Post subject:  

nosystemdthanks wrote:
no, the bsd community uses tar and feathers-- as long as it is a version of tar that is under a permissive license and compiled with clang instead of gcc.

i dont really begrudge this aspect of the bsd community. i think of their love of permissive licensing as more of a backup plan/alternative than a plot to destroy everything that free software works for.

gcc move to (more restrictive) gpl3 meant FreeBSD having to stay with a older gpl2 version of gcc .. and as that increasingly became outdated a move was made over to clang. Pretty much a necessity to fulfil commercial usage requirements/regulations.

OpenBSD do not permit blobs (lack of visibility/security auditing), hence nvidia is pretty much out. That it doesn't run on such a wider base of hardware as Linux isn't deemed a issue to those that appreciate its quality just have to be more selective with hardware purchases (i.e. nvidia's loss/radeon's gain).

_________________
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) :wq
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
nosystemdthanks

Joined: 03 May 2018
Posts: 540

PostPosted: Fri 16 Nov 2018, 00:53    Post subject:  

i appreciate the additional details and insight, though its also a political difference, not just a practical one.

its a political difference im ok with, as i said, but the bsd community is also pretty harshly critical of the gpl sometimes, even writing songs that deeply mock rms.

its also possible those are "good clean fun" and no more a reflection of how they feel than a weird al parody. but honestly, id sooner believe its somewhere between the two. for the fsf, the decisions/priorities bsd makes are certainly political. but i think they are somewhat political to the bsd community as well. perhaps a little less so.

_________________
the end of the distro war, and the distro https://ptpb.pw/OnBT
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
musher0

Joined: 04 Jan 2009
Posts: 13147
Location: Gatineau (Qc), Canada

PostPosted: Fri 16 Nov 2018, 02:00    Post subject:  

nosystemdthanks wrote:
Quote:
hollywood frequently lobbies canadas government to import this nonsense,
so check your own laws before you assume they are different. i note with
pleasure that so far-- i am unaware of hollywood succeeding at passing bills
like that. but i certainly dont trust trudeau with this.

Hi, nosystemdthanks.

So far so good. The new NAFTA (whatever its new name is) still has the
cultural exception clause.

French-Canadians know all too well what kind of cultural bulldozer hit the
Cajuns in Louisiana. So we are forever on the defensive on the cultural front.

Also I think "colonialist" is one adjective Pres. Trump would not have
risked being added to the list of adjectives he is already being called by
his opponents.

Besides the language barrier, French Canada's star-system can be traced
to the early 1900's, so it creates a 2nd barrier to Hollywoodian influence.

(I apologize in advance to my English-speaking compatriots if I have the
following facts wrong.)

English Canada was not long to catch on and develop its own culture.
I believe that the English-Canadian star-system started during Gordon
Lightfoot's era, and fine-arts culture very likely with the Group of Seven
(1920's). Plus our National Film Board (a federal institution) has existed
since 1939.

As much as Canadians appreciate well-done American movies, we know
those movies are offsprings of a culture that's quite different from ours.

About the Trudeau gov't, it was elected because Canadians had had
enough of the previous gov't impoverishing the working poor. (IMO)

As long as he doesn't try anything funny to sabotage what's left of the
middle class, I think he's good for another term.

Plus he has a winning ace in his gov't in the person of Chrystia Freeland,
our current External Affairs Minister. I don't know how she and her team
managed to fence off some of Trump's most voracious and often
unfounded demands concerning NAFTA, but they did it. It could have
been worse.

BFN.

_________________
musher0
~~~~~~~~~~
Je suis né pour aimer et non pas pour haïr. (Sophocle) /
I was born to love and not to hate. (Sophocles)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
jamesbond

Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 3186
Location: The Blue Marble

PostPosted: Fri 16 Nov 2018, 02:24    Post subject:  

nosystemdthanks wrote:
i appreciate the additional details and insight, though its also a political difference, not just a practical one.

You made my day Laughing
I thoroughly enjoyed your treatises in this thread and agree to most of the points you made. i couldn't say it better myself.

Quote:
its a political difference im ok with, as i said, but the bsd community is also pretty harshly critical of the gpl sometimes, even writing songs that deeply mock rms.
Yeah the good fat lot, all of them, considering that the very thing that got RMS started was they closed the source for Unix (BSD *is* Unix). RMS starting GPL sparked a movement on their own side to keep the BSD open.

It's okay to disagree with RMS to but deny the fact that he _started_ the whole thing is just history-rewriting.

_________________
Fatdog64, Slacko and Puppeee user. Puppy user since 2.13.
Contributed Fatdog64 packages thread.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
nosystemdthanks

Joined: 03 May 2018
Posts: 540

PostPosted: Fri 16 Nov 2018, 03:43    Post subject:  

jamesbond wrote:
RMS starting GPL sparked a movement on their own side to keep the BSD open.

It's okay to disagree with RMS to but deny the fact that he _started_ the whole thing is just history-rewriting.


i agree, and thats how i ended up on the free software side. open source bills itself as more reasonable, practical, and inclusive-- and free software as naive idealism.

i started on the open source side, but facts mattered. facts and history re-writing are bound to face each other down sooner or later, and i dont like being lied to.

when open source claims to be more reasonable, they are talking about false compromises and favouring unwritten rules over stuffy-sounding written ones. theyre talking about being more reasonable on the surface, theyre talking about appearances and less about true nature. and it works, for the same reason that monopolies gain footholds.

when they talk about being more practical, they mean more practical for monopolies who want to participate halfway and still get full kudos just for showing up-- when they talk about being more inclusive, its that old idea of monopolising what "inclusive" means and kicking out everyone who disagrees-- which in practice is often more exclusive and proves to be really just hype and lies.

all of which i enjoyed for plenty of years under microsofts regime, thanks anyway.

yes, "floss" is an acronym of a portmanteau, or a portmanteau of two acronyms. but it implies that you can be a free software advocate and open source will be cool about it-- and not spew venom at you collectively for your politics like linus torvalds does-- and that they wont constantly create a version of history that writes you out of the picture and says nothing when people ridiculously credit torvalds with everything done for all the years prior to linux existing.

it fits their "monopoly is ok" narrative. to be honest, anybody that thinks monopolies are ok and thats the same thing as free software-- is deeply naive or at least, deeply misinformed.

to then look at the people spending lots of money and time and dedication deliberately misinforming them and not being pissed off about being lied to for a few years-- is also naive. but i maintain that open source isnt all bad. its deeply dishonest and rotten at the core, and a lot of good people are associated with it regardless-- who should take another look at the lies theyre swallowing every day.

a lot of the "big concerns" (perhaps all but one or two) that people have about the gpl for example, are just people that know better saying "what if, what if, what if?" until everyone else is curious too. a lot of it can be fixed with 10 minutes of research that isnt done, because "what if" is repeated until it drowns out the easy-to-find answers to "what if."

free software isnt perfect, but its a great deal more respectable in this regard.

now, am i in favour of some middle ground that isnt built on re-writing history and blaming people for being honest and having written rules-- while still offering alternatives? basically-- what open source claims but doesnt deliever?

sure. maybe free software is better than that too-- but part of freedom is letting people decide for themselves and organise themselves more. the fsf is a little too top-down for my taste. we need them, they deserve more credit despite (and frankly robbed of by) the dishonest marginalisation and co-opting that open source has orchestrated and linus torvalds has worn like a crown-- but people who disagree still have a right to do so.

what they dont have a right to do is rewrite history in a way that is so self-serving, you cant swallow it forever if you like facts and have perspective. certainly they have a right to be mistaken-- but what theyre doing is training an army of corporate shills.

im pro-business, but any monopoly built on and propped up by misinformation is bad for society and nothing to do with freedom. and lets face it, thats what it generally takes to sustain a monopoly-- misinformation.

open source is simply a lie. maybe not the bruce perens version-- but that version was his own misconception. it was once mine, too. its sad that it has so much hold over good people.

open source really means that its immature and hateful to put a dollar sign in micro$oft but you can call the people who are being more honest "neckbeards" because the truth is-- youve aligned yourself with one, and against the other. so you are trained to defend the corporation and attack the individual.

perhaps it should be called open $ource, then. but only because we dont have any punctuation that implies monopoly-- only shills. its not because i hate dollars. i only hate the love of money ranked in importance over the love of people or a more honest assessment of history. that much i find pretty repulsive.

i have plenty of critiques for my own side-- if people are going to make a mantra of "free as in free speech" they should care a little more about the latter. it can be a bit stifling at times. i wouldnt say open source is better in this regard. both sides make it clear that you are generally free to agree with them.

musher0 wrote:
Plus our National Film Board (a federal institution) has existed
since 1939.


im a big fan of the nfb, as well as tvo. if it comes down to scrapping the nfb or scrapping nafta-- keep the nfb. trade agreements like nafta, cafta and acta will funnel canadas economy directly to china. china doesnt keep its side of trade agreements. dont take it from me, ask (canadian brett) gaylor how it really works. or michael geist.

_________________
the end of the distro war, and the distro https://ptpb.pw/OnBT

Last edited by nosystemdthanks on Fri 16 Nov 2018, 04:13; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
musher0

Joined: 04 Jan 2009
Posts: 13147
Location: Gatineau (Qc), Canada

PostPosted: Fri 16 Nov 2018, 04:07    Post subject:  

@nosystemdthanks

Your DMCA is how the US of A hooked up with the WIPO Accord (q.v. the
wikipedia article about it). As you say, it was passed under the Clinton
Admin.

It had been in the air internationally for some time, though, since
1967 to be exact. Forget Hollywood, CA, as point of origin of this int'l
legislation: Paris, France, or Geneva, Switzerland, are more like it.

Almost all countries represented at the UN are members of WIPO. To
spell it out, Canada is a member, but not Vanuatu.

If you download -- through any of your devices! -- the two noticeably
non-famous movies I wrote music for in my twenties, I expect to receive
a royalty cheque from you. Cool Or do it from Vanuatu. Sad

BFN.

_________________
musher0
~~~~~~~~~~
Je suis né pour aimer et non pas pour haïr. (Sophocle) /
I was born to love and not to hate. (Sophocles)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
nosystemdthanks

Joined: 03 May 2018
Posts: 540

PostPosted: Fri 16 Nov 2018, 04:18    Post subject:  

i miss wipo, and youre not watching closely enough (imo.)

wipo is much more reasonable than nafta, cafta, acta-- all of which push for more restrictions (and fewer safeguards and safe harbours) than wipo. so youve been sold a bill of goods.

this isnt personal, i really do miss wipo and intensely dislike these newer more hideous versions of it. thats the only reason for any passionate language on the topic. theyre some of the worst decisions made in american politics in the past 100 years-- as well as large constitutional threats. the constitution should outweigh trade agreements. in theory they do, in practice-- we are still waiting.

freedom of speech and this level of copyright expansion cannot both happen-- one denies the other its existence. for most of the time this country has had a constitution, the 1st amendment was not really bothered by copyright. today there is a constant struggle between them. its not the amendment thats broken, its modern copyright law that needs to be struck down. but i dont expect your sympathy there. older copyright law? not so bothered by it. it worked until they went berserk with it.

Quote:
If you download -- through any of your devices! -- the two noticeably
non-famous movies I wrote music for in my twenties, I expect to receive
a royalty cheque from you. 8) Or do it from Vanuatu. :(


im much more comfortable with the idea of tax-supported artists than the orwellian surveillance state that pretends to ensure you will get paid for your work. fortunately for you, both exist. i am dedicated to alternatives that are less oppressive, but at least jaron lanier agrees with you partway.

every industry that has claimed royalties has waged war on the same sort of so-called-piracy that they built their own industry on. you might not understand unless you wrote sheet music when that was the only way to publish a song-- and watched your work get appropriated (without royalty) by the piano-player scroll business and the record industry, both of which came later. (as did radio.)

so many concepts of "fairness" are constructed from a position of sheer hypocrisy, its a wonder i believe in fairness at all.

additional concepts are built on the myth of originality-- which is often just bunk.

if patents worked like modern copyright, then artists would only be allowed to play songs than the instrument inventors approved of.

in fact, patents on rare occasion have worked that way-- before hollywood could truly establish itself, it had to get far away from edisons thugs! his patents-- you could barely use his equipment to make films except on his terms!

everyone gets by on special pleading-- not on fairness. theres nothing fair about "intellectual property." pray that artists are never saddled with it-- you get to use all those instruments that are in the public domain (including the piano, the alphabet, and the pen.)

if js bachs estate recouped all the royalties from the past few centuries, maybe more artists would be looking for alternatives, too. youre nothing but a bunch of pirates.

_________________
the end of the distro war, and the distro https://ptpb.pw/OnBT
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
wiak

Joined: 11 Dec 2007
Posts: 1012
Location: not Bulgaria

PostPosted: Fri 16 Nov 2018, 04:49    Post subject:  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_movement#Economics

Quote:
Of particular interest to economists is the willingness of programmers in the free software movement to work, often producing higher-quality than commercial programmers, without financial compensation. In his 1998 article "The High-Tech Gift Economy," Richard Barbrook suggested that the then-nascent free software movement represented a return to the gift economy building on hobbyism and the absence of economic scarcity on the internet.[18] E. Gabriella Coleman has emphasized the importance of accreditation, respect, and honour within the free software community as a form of compensation for contributions to projects, over and against financial motivations.


I wish people would also boycott all shops and supermarkets, producers of food, construction materials, energy supplies, and all the other things needed (or demanded) to sustain our family's lives since these evil entities refuse to produce and supply all there produce for free to the rest of us in the 'community'. Who cares that they couldn't pay their employees (which ultimately includes most all of us?). Yeah, but programmers are different - I suppose it means that professional programmers (those who have programming as a career, meaning those that do it for a living) should get a real job since plenty of programmers willing to do it for free. So how come not many (any?) farmers willing to produce food for free?! I'm missing something in the argument I guess. Or is it indeed that programmers just need 'Ego' praise/satisfaction... oh wow, ain't that silly(?)...

Software being released as open source and re-usable certainly helps other developers build (and improve) future software via modification, expansion, and combination of bits and pieces or whole parts, functions, or libraries of functions (if the software is released with a license, which does not hinder of prevent such combination). That's why, personally, I like MIT license and find GPL licenses generally 'a bit, sometimes more than a bit' annoying.

But do most people in the world work for free (at the professional level)? Do you??! Nice idea, but seems a bit daft to me. Rather, I suspect programmers (even some hobbyist ones) are tending towards Android programming nowadays since most programs written for Android include pop-up adds and the like, which painful though I personally find them, do provide a means of generating some income (and users can pay to have the ads removed). The problem (aside from encouraging programmers, including the amateurs amongst us, away from Linux application programming) is that most such Android applications are not at all open source - they are closed source proprietry. That is the real pain in my opinion. As far as I see it, GPL licensing terms encourage programmers to move towards closed source proprietry. i.e. I think it is fine that professional programmers are paid for their produce (like most every other kind of product producer), but closed source hinders future developments because of its hidden nature, whereas, vice versa, the visible nature of open source helps and encourages human technological advance/development. That's the only true 'moral' reason, in terms of the betterment of human society, that open source is better in my opinion. I disagree entirely that software, in this society we live in, should not cost money for any software that proves to be useful, desired and used. It seems only reasonable to me that, aside from hobby programming software, which is basically a fun pursuit, the cost of useful/desired and used software should be proportional to the time/labour put into its production (like most every other product produced in our type of society) - so what is wrong with that argument, pray tell? Yeah, nice to dream of altruistic utopias and champion them I guess.

Microsoft products are also not open source, and that to me is the rubbish of that product, not that we have to pay to use it. There is a big difference, of course, between the concept of 'open source' and that of 'copyright' or indeed of 'intellectual property right'. If Microsoft released say Windows 10 as open source (in the sense of being able to read the code) and someone then started selling their own compile of it for personal profit, obviously such action would be a 'problem' that needs sorting out (in terms of collaborative software making and paying companies, and their employees, for their hard work).

Making everything opensource, and free to fork and distribute, is certainly a simple (simplistic!) 'solution'. And we all love 'free' things. Come to think of it, by far the majority of professional programmers (which I suspect most of us are not) must surely be working in the proprietry software world, as their day-job at least, or the majority wouldn't be able to make enough money to survive. Yeah, a few make a living out of FOSS 'support', or similar, I suppose - hardly enough such people to make it a worthwhile career however; better to get an interview with Apple, or Google, Amazon, or ... Microsoft? Come to think of it, a friend of mine that I used to work beside ended up employed by Amazon but is now employed by Google in one of their outlets in Singapore; he is very good at all things Linux too as it happens, as good or better probably than most anyone on this forum, but most of his 'wealth' came from working with Microsoft server/networking infrastructure before his later employment with these cloud infrastructure technologies of Amazon/Google.

I wouldn't mind a job with Amazon or Google (if only... dream on...). Nice to get a reasonably well paid job, no? Of course, that's not true - money... paying for things... evil concepts!

wiak
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
nosystemdthanks

Joined: 03 May 2018
Posts: 540

PostPosted: Fri 16 Nov 2018, 04:54    Post subject:  

Quote:
I wish people would also boycott all shops and supermarkets, producers of food, construction materials, energy supplies, and all the other things needed (or demanded) to sustain our family's lives since these evil entities refuse to produce and supply all there produce for free to the rest of us in the 'community'.


for a more accurate, less absurd metaphor, try propping up monsanto (now bayer.)

no one wiak, including rms himself, says that anyone who doesnt want to should work free of charge.

they are saying there shouldnt be a monopoly.

basically, theyre saying you should able to copy food, not get it free of charge-- which you can! for every 1,000 years of agriculture, plants were in the public domain and could be copied freely. no patents, no eula, none of it was piracy. only since 1995 was there any legal monopoly on organisms in the united states. and thats a dangerous change.

all of these changes people are boycotting are fairly recent in history. the damage they do is notable. no one is telling farmers they have to work for free. theyre saying its a right to plant seeds.

"home gardening is killing the farm industry! AND ITS ILLEGAL!"

_________________
the end of the distro war, and the distro https://ptpb.pw/OnBT
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
musher0

Joined: 04 Jan 2009
Posts: 13147
Location: Gatineau (Qc), Canada

PostPosted: Fri 16 Nov 2018, 05:14    Post subject:  

Hi nosystemdthanks.

You wrote:
Quote:
freedom of speech and this level of copyright expansion cannot both
happen-- one denies the other its existence. for most of the time this
country has had a constitution, the 1st amendment was not really
bothered by copyright. today there is a constant struggle between them.
its not the amendment thats broken, its modern copyright law that needs
to be struck down. but i dont expect your sympathy there. older copyright
law? not so bothered by it. it worked until they went berserk with it.
Sorry, that's your opinion and I cannot agree. It is clear to me that
freedom of speech has nothing to do with getting paid for your work as
an artist, a plumber or a software dev.

You are free to criticize or praise or ignore my work. THAT is freedom of
speech.

You are NOT free to steal from me any earnings I can rightfully derive
from my work. THAT is a crime.

If you think that royalties are an outdated form of earnings, please invent
another mode by which I can put bread on my table and pay my bills.


About your US-centric remarks --

It is also my deep belief that in this global era, any constitution of any
country should be subservient to international accords. What has been
deemed good for the rest of humanity should also be deemed good for
one's nationality. Minor variations could be allowed for cultural differences,
if need be, but that's it.

That mentality should be fostered in schools all over the world. To think
otherwise is to pave the way to a new type of colonization. Colonization
has no place in a world of equal citizens. Why should any vote be worth
more than the vote of any other citizen of the world?

I realize the current US admin. would like to have the entire world at its
beck and call. So be it. I have the courage of my opinions. Why should
the votes of 5 % of the world population outweigh the votes of the 7.5
billion other voters?

We are not first of all Canadians, Americans, Senegalese, Italians, etc.
First of all, we are humans.

I believe it is important to remember that in a world where armaments
still exist that can destroy continents at the push of a button.

And before anyone of you comes up saying that the above statements
are politically right, left or center: "I don't give a damn."

BFN.

_________________
musher0
~~~~~~~~~~
Je suis né pour aimer et non pas pour haïr. (Sophocle) /
I was born to love and not to hate. (Sophocles)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
nosystemdthanks

Joined: 03 May 2018
Posts: 540

PostPosted: Fri 16 Nov 2018, 05:45    Post subject:  

musher0 wrote:
It is clear to me that
freedom of speech has nothing to do with getting paid for your work as
an artist, a plumber or a software dev.


im not the person who implied the two have anything to do with each other-- you and wiak did, and i responded to that.

Quote:
You are free to criticize or praise or ignore my work. THAT is freedom of
speech.


oh freedom of speech does go beyond just that.


Quote:
You are NOT free to steal from me any earnings I can rightfully derive
from my work. THAT is a crime.


yes! if i went into your bank account or your home and took your money, that would be a crime. if i quote you without your permission, that is not a crime.

but until we are talking about the same thing, then youre simply equivocating. its a basic logical fallacy, about as basic as fallacy gets. as i said earlier, it generally takes misinformation to sustain a monopoly.

Quote:
If you think that royalties are an outdated form of earnings, please invent
another mode by which I can put bread on my table and pay my bills.


oh, i think royalties could work to some degree in some context, and people have invented other modes.

in fact, an increasing number of arists (and entrepreneurs) are using those alternatives. one uni professor is building a new university on one of those alternatives (patreon.) people are quitting their day jobs and making a living from this alternative. as well as others.

one or two people have publically stopped producing art as a result of some more recent, failed power grabs. lily allen, sadly, is no longer showering us with her diva-level talent. but apart from that, why arent artists throwing themselves from bridges in droves, like the people who were ruined by the early 20th century stock market crash? after all, this affects artists all over the world! and no one is paying them anymore!

meanwhile, ticket sales are just fine-- musicians make most of their money performing, not recording. (dont tell anybody.)

Quote:
It is also my deep belief that in this global era, any constitution of any
country should be subservient to international accords.


then start learning to speak chinese. that will come in handy when the world votes on whether to keep french.

Quote:
What has been
deemed good for the rest of humanity should also be deemed good for
one's nationality.


im not quite that collectivist.

Quote:
Minor variations could be allowed for cultural differences,
if need be, but that's it.


well, then lets be sure you dont become the king of the world.

"cultural differences" include whether you have a prime minister, president or king. indeed, to some degree they could be considered minor variations.

the world government youre proposing may not work at all. it could be the most oppressive regime in human history.

Quote:
That mentality should be fostered in schools all over the world. To think
otherwise is to pave the way to a new type of colonization.


i would classify your statement as "not even wrong."

Quote:
Colonization has no place in a world of equal citizens. Why should any vote be worth more than the vote of any other citizen of the world?


if anyone in the world should equally vote on what happens in america or canada, why stop there? why shouldnt everyone enter your house and vote on what happens there, too? of course they have no claim on your home-- just as putin should have no right to vote here.

Quote:
I realize the current US admin. would like to have the entire world at its
beck and call.


i have argued against contemporary american copyright in every post here, you have defended it. you are the one siding with us law in this thread, which makes your ad hom completely inappropriate and irrelevant here. on top of the fact that it would be irrelevant anyway.

Quote:
So be it. I have the courage of my opinions. Why should
the votes of 5 % of the world population outweigh the votes of the 7.5
billion other voters?


and more to the point-- what does that question have to do with any point made by ANY person in this entire thread?

Quote:
We are not first of all Canadians, Americans, Senegalese, Italians, etc.
First of all, we are humans.


this is a ridiculous response to me working within the reality that copyright (even international copyright) has jurisdictions--

it is disingenuous (and frankly nonsensical) particularly when you are once again conflating dmca with wipo, and i (not you) prefer the un wipo treaty (because its more lax) and you prefer the stricter american terms!

youre the one being more regional here-- wipo really wasnt so bad! in fact this continent has tried and thankfully mostly failed, to get the un to adopt worse terms like the local ones that im against.

so really, what grounds do you have for making this about "the world" at all? it contradicts your stance on the issue, it doesnt support it.

Quote:
And before anyone of you comes up saying that the above statements
are politically right, left or center: "I don't give a damn."


do you "give a damn" about context or rational argument, though?

because i dont care about left and right on this, just right and wrong.

first ad hom that is doubly irrelevant (because it doesnt apply to me and wouldnt be relevant if it did) and then ad hom that is speculative and hypothetical--

just being intellectually honest would be ideal here-- no ones asking you to do that from any side but your own.

GET THIS STRAIGHT musher-- the usa exports the stricter copyright regime YOU are sided with.

i am not making us-centric remarks. im the one arguing against us-centrism in canadian policy, while you as a canadian welcome it with open arms and reject the more reasonable u.n. policy (it is irrelevant that it is u.n. policy, but wipo is more reasonable nonetheless.)

check your facts and indeed your position, because it is north-america-centric and completely antagonistic to global human free speech rights. your argument is the purest hypocrisy, fallacious and based on the opposite of facts.

id recommend you get to work on fixing at least one of those-- though im not sure if youre requesting payment for an honest argument as well, and providing this one instead as a teaser.

if i had a dime for every time someone on this forum conflated the norms in their country (or their assumption) with the worlds norms-- only so they could falsely accuse an american of doing the same thing because they cant tell the difference between americans and one elected official, i could buy the rights to whatever two songs you authored.

everyone knows that canadians arent trudeau, and the chinese people arent the communist party, and the british arent theresa may-- but that simple fact which is patently OBVIOUS to any literate commenter in the world regarding ANY OTHER COUNTRY IN THE WORLD is completely lost any time someone wants to throw out the accusation that americans are all siding on every jot and tittle with their own idiot in charge.

you cant comprehend how hypocritical, condescending, and ridiculous that makes you. the appropriate response musher, is "up yours." there is a complete double standard on this forum about this-- usually from the brits, since the aussies tend to know better.

those who do this tend hide their own nationalism behind false accusations of the same towards people from countries they dont respect. its pathetic, and your use of it in your arguments is pathetic.

youre too fond of leaning on this supposed worldliness of yours-- dont be such a bái chī. if you have to be so insulting and reason so poorly at the same time, youre only begging to have someone take all of that and throw it right back in your face. bon appétit!

_________________
the end of the distro war, and the distro https://ptpb.pw/OnBT
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
musher0

Joined: 04 Jan 2009
Posts: 13147
Location: Gatineau (Qc), Canada

PostPosted: Fri 16 Nov 2018, 15:56    Post subject:  

I will confess that this previous comment of mine is indeed off-thread:
Quote:
So be it. I have the courage of my opinions. Why should
the votes of 5 % of the world population outweigh the votes of the 7.5
billion other voters?
and that, as an attempt to puncture ill-placed American pride, in this
context, it was unelegant and out of place. Consider it an afterburn of the
recent NAFTA negociations between your country and mine. Please accept
my apologies for that off-topic.

That said, for the rest, in no order:
-- The Geneva Convention offers 50 years recognition of copyright after
death of author; the US, 28 years after initial publication. Sorry, US
legislation; I can and will go with the Geneva Convention.

-- you perceive "ad homs". Re-read my post, there aren't any, against you
or anyone else. My stance was and is FOR internationalism and AGAINST
colonialism. As I mentioned above, mostly off-topic in this thread, although
valid generally.

-- GPL & Co offer no significant alternative to royalties ATM. Most of the devs
on this board contribute to Puppy as a hobby, that's true, and earn a living
otherwise. So no real problem.

The FSF et al. suggest getting paid by selling the docs, but hm... on a
voluntary basis on the part of the "customer". Or charge more for the
packaging and expedition than they really cost.

It's not very logical, is it?, to reroute the earnings generated by one activity
to another. Or honest, for that matter.

In other words, a lot of fancy skating is done around it, but the essential
problem for the free-lancing professionals in this trade, of putting in place a
fair pay system for their work, remains whole.

-- Thank you kindly for peppering your post with all those touching
compliments about me! Laughing Wink

BFN.

_________________
musher0
~~~~~~~~~~
Je suis né pour aimer et non pas pour haïr. (Sophocle) /
I was born to love and not to hate. (Sophocles)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 3 of 4 [51 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
 Forum index » Taking the Puppy out for a walk » Suggestions
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
[ Time: 0.1350s ][ Queries: 11 (0.0063s) ][ GZIP on ]