Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #183760

Re: funding & viability questions of GPL enforcement.

Show all headers | View raw

On Sun, Jul 16, 2017 at 8:47 PM, Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it> wrote:
> There are salient discrepancies in copylefting collective work —as there are
> mismatches in working as a free software developer in a western economic model.
>

There are salient discrepancies in every licensing model, so-called
free/libre, free/open, free-as-in-beer, sell-your-first-child-shrinkwrap,
etc.

Shoot, the entire concept of property is still not worked out well.

It only works if we agree to cooperate.

And people and companies who receive excess and refuse to return
it to the market simply are not cooperating, irregardless of either license
or external economic system. (Excess includes not only money and less
tangible proxies for value, but also control, which is one place where
communism and socialism historically fail.)

The whole idea that they have to protect themselves from users of their
so-called intellectual property is where we, as a society are failing to do
the reality check.

>  Let me just say that this discussion, working out the legal details of the
> problem, is very interesting.  I guess that's how every inch of freedom has to
> be conquered, and I'm delighted that this list allows me to witness it.

I think you meant "fought for" and not "conquered"?

> Please go ahead.
>
> On Sat 15/Jul/2017 19:24:56 +0200 Bradley M. Kuhn wrote:
>> [...]
>> Finally, this is probably a good moment -- since this thread has erupted on
>> a Debian Mailing List -- to let everyone know that Conservancy also
>> organizes a GPL copyright aggregation project for Debian contributors as
>> well, see: https://sfconservancy.org/copyleft-compliance/#debian and
>> https://sfconservancy.org/news/2015/aug/17/debian/.

Crowd-funding without the middleman!

> [...]

-- 
Joel Rees

One of these days I'll get someone to pay me
to design a language that combines the best of Forth and C.
Then I'll be able to leap wide instruction sets with a single #ifdef,
run faster than a speeding infinite loop with a #define,
and stop all integer size bugs with my bare cast.
http://defining-computers.blogspot.com/2017/06/reinventing-computers.html

More of my delusions:
http://reiisi.blogspot.com/2017/05/do-not-pay-modern-danegeld-ransomware.html
http://reiisi.blogspot.jp/p/novels-i-am-writing.html

Back to linux.debian.user | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is  blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel? Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> - 2017-06-19 21:00 +0200
  Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is  blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel? Bruce Perens <bruce@perens.com> - 2017-06-19 21:40 +0200
    Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is  blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel? Bruce Perens <bruce@perens.com> - 2017-06-28 04:10 +0200
      Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is  blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel? Bruce Perens <bruce@perens.com> - 2017-07-10 17:40 +0200
      Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel? "Bradley M. Kuhn" <bkuhn@sfconservancy.org> - 2017-07-14 20:20 +0200
        Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is  blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel? Bruce Perens <bruce@perens.com> - 2017-07-14 22:30 +0200
          funding & viability questions of GPL enforcement. "Bradley M. Kuhn" <bkuhn@sfconservancy.org> - 2017-07-15 19:30 +0200
            Re: funding & viability questions of GPL enforcement. Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it> - 2017-07-16 13:50 +0200
              Re: funding & viability questions of GPL enforcement. Martin Read <zen75502@zen.co.uk> - 2017-07-16 17:20 +0200
                Re: funding & viability questions of GPL enforcement. Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it> - 2017-07-19 13:20 +0200
                Re: funding & viability questions of GPL enforcement. Martin Read <zen75502@zen.co.uk> - 2017-07-19 23:20 +0200
                Re: funding & viability questions of GPL enforcement. Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it> - 2017-07-20 14:10 +0200
                Re: funding & viability questions of GPL enforcement. Fungi4All <fungilife@protonmail.com> - 2017-07-20 22:20 +0200
                Re: funding & viability questions of GPL enforcement. Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it> - 2017-07-21 20:40 +0200
                Re: funding & viability questions of GPL enforcement. Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-07-22 03:40 +0200
                Re: funding & viability questions of GPL enforcement. Fungi4All <fungilife@protonmail.com> - 2017-07-27 11:00 +0200
              Re: funding & viability questions of GPL enforcement. "Bradley M. Kuhn" <bkuhn@sfconservancy.org> - 2017-07-17 00:50 +0200
              Re: funding & viability questions of GPL enforcement. Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-07-17 03:00 +0200
                Re: funding & viability questions of GPL enforcement. "Bradley M. Kuhn" <bkuhn@ebb.org> - 2017-07-17 21:40 +0200
  Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel? deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2017-06-20 00:20 +0200
    Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is  blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel? Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-07-15 06:50 +0200
      Re: Why does no one care that Brad Spengler of GRSecurity is  blatantly violating the intention of the rightsholders to the Linux Kernel? Nick Boyce <nick@steelyglint.org> - 2017-07-20 16:20 +0200

csiph-web