4 ms·

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html That essay is what made me a firm supporter.

jonhendry 15y ago
Okay, he wrote a scary story. What has he done to promote laws to prevent what he fears, and to fight laws that lead to what he fears?
- pingswept 15y ago
  From what I understand, RMS has spent a large fraction of his working life in the last 20 years traveling the world to speak to people about free software. He could be dismissed as too extreme, but dismissing him as someone who hasn't fought for his beliefs is way off. His speaking schedule is often published in the FSF newsletter; he appears to speak to a group about free software around once per week.
  - jonhendry 15y ago
    That's just it, he spoke about free software, not these larger issues. And getting people to adopt free software is an orthogonal issue. Even if GPL software had 99% market share in the US, and everyone in the country were running the same kind of computer as Stallman, the government could still step in and pass all kinds of draconian laws. Getting regular people to adopt the GPL ethos is fine, but if the ethos doesn't permeate government as well, Stallman might as well be touring around promoting the Spice Girls for all governments will be prevented from doing intrusive things.
    - tjr 15y ago
      Richard speaks about more than just free software per se; recent speeches include Copyright vs Community, A Free Digital Society, and The Danger of Software Patents.
    - rjbond3rd 15y ago
      > That's just it, he spoke about free software, not these larger issues... What's larger than freedom?
      - jonhendry 15y ago
        There are many freedoms. I suspect Stallman would be happy if he achieved all his free software goals, even if he lost freedoms that most other people consider more important.
        tankenmate 15y ago
        I think you completely misunderstand RMS then, I think you would find that he would argue that all freedoms are necessary and worth fighting for. In many speeches I have heard him give he has said that he could fight for other freedoms but the freedom he could do the best job of fighting for are software freedoms. I would suggest you read more of RMS's work and listen to more of his talks.
        jiggy2011 15y ago
        Yes, exactly. Let's assume Stallman had qualified as a Medical Doctor rather than a Computer Programmer. Perhaps he would be making the same argument about pharmaceutical patents?
    - super_mario 15y ago
      Are you seriously expecting Stallman or any one person to "fight" the government and prevent it from passing some draconian law. You seem to thoroughly misunderstand how a modern democracy operates. It's up to the people to prevent a government like that by not electing politicians that have draconian views on the subject. And the only way people can ever do that is if they are aware of all the issues. And Richard is doing a lot to make us all aware of the issues. In my mind he is doing all he can do, and at the right level of involvement, where he has the most know how to influence the minds of "regular" people.
      - jonhendry 15y ago
        Compare the FSF to the EFF.
        stfp 15y ago
        They do different things? That are both needed and important?
    - noibl 15y ago
      The point is to make such laws unworkable through practical measures, not to generate political anger in the uncertain hope that that will balance the efforts of proprietorial lobbyists and state security extremists indefinitely.
- spodek 15y ago
  He co-authored a license that anyone can use to share software, prose, and other copyrightable material. That license, and others derived from it, are at the root of most non-proprietary software and many types of user-created content. Using the internet means you've used software that likely could not have been created without such licenses. Wikipedia is another example of something using a license derived from the one he helped create. Helping create flourishing communities of people legally sharing each others' work, collectively creating great works, influences legislation. Imagine if no licenses existed for people to legally remix each other's work without explicit permission. Disney, the MPAA, the RIAA, and others would have had greater ability to lengthen copyright terms, increase penalties for infringement, and so on. Microsoft had a strong play for extending from the desktop to servers when Unix was fragmented. I wonder what might have happened if apache didn't exist to compete with Microsoft -- how much more influence Microsoft might have had over U.S. legislation. He's done a lot more than just help write the GPL, but that alone contributed a lot.
  - jonhendry 15y ago
    Yes, but what has he done that has been directed towards US laws, regulations, and policies, to protect the right to read?
    - _sh 15y ago
      Apart from better sanitation and medicine and education and irrigation and public health and roads and a freshwater system and baths and public order and a legal document designed to protect the right to read and modify and a philosophy that has influenced an entire generation of creators...?
    - bad_user 15y ago
      While I don't agree with the parent, as the BSD license and BSD-licensed software would have happened anyway, the GPL is the perfect example of what hackers can do against awful legislation. You see, the GPL takes the copyright system and turns it on its head. That's why it is named a copyleft license, an obvious pun. How does it do that? Well, copyright prevents distribution. The GPL rides this restriction and says that you may not distribute GPL-licensed software unless (1) you distribute it with no extra restrictions + (2) the distributed binary is either accompanied by source-code or the source-code is available on request. The GPL COULD NOT demand this if it weren't for the copyright law and in regards to freedom / protecting users rights, it works out great because nobody can abuse the GPL without legal repercussions. It's actually beautiful if you think about it and innovative - it enabled open-source / free software to really disrupt the software industry, creating the equivalent of the public commons. And this movement went viral and moved to books, music and movies. And this would have happened without the GPL, but on a much lower scale. The GPL is the spark that started the fire. BTW - to change the world you don't need to change the laws. The alternative is to make them obsolete and technology has a habit of doing that ;-)
- cabalamat 15y ago
  He was and is a major inspiration for the international pirate party movement, which if the power of the MAFIAA is to be destroyed, is the most likely actor to do it by political means.
- anatoly 15y ago
  It isn't that he wrote a scary story. It's that his story looked much less plausible in 1997 than it does now. I remember reading the story at that time. I thought it had something going for it, but was very far-fetched and unrealistic. 14 years later, it seems way more plausible.

jonhendry 15y ago

Okay, he wrote a scary story. What has he done to promote laws to prevent what he fears, and to fight laws that lead to what he fears?

pingswept 15y ago
From what I understand, RMS has spent a large fraction of his working life in the last 20 years traveling the world to speak to people about free software. He could be dismissed as too extreme, but dismissing him as someone who hasn't fought for his beliefs is way off. His speaking schedule is often published in the FSF newsletter; he appears to speak to a group about free software around once per week.
- jonhendry 15y ago
  That's just it, he spoke about free software, not these larger issues. And getting people to adopt free software is an orthogonal issue. Even if GPL software had 99% market share in the US, and everyone in the country were running the same kind of computer as Stallman, the government could still step in and pass all kinds of draconian laws. Getting regular people to adopt the GPL ethos is fine, but if the ethos doesn't permeate government as well, Stallman might as well be touring around promoting the Spice Girls for all governments will be prevented from doing intrusive things.
  - tjr 15y ago
    Richard speaks about more than just free software per se; recent speeches include Copyright vs Community, A Free Digital Society, and The Danger of Software Patents.
  - rjbond3rd 15y ago
    > That's just it, he spoke about free software, not these larger issues... What's larger than freedom?
    - jonhendry 15y ago
      There are many freedoms. I suspect Stallman would be happy if he achieved all his free software goals, even if he lost freedoms that most other people consider more important.
      - tankenmate 15y ago
        I think you completely misunderstand RMS then, I think you would find that he would argue that all freedoms are necessary and worth fighting for. In many speeches I have heard him give he has said that he could fight for other freedoms but the freedom he could do the best job of fighting for are software freedoms. I would suggest you read more of RMS's work and listen to more of his talks.
        jiggy2011 15y ago
        Yes, exactly. Let's assume Stallman had qualified as a Medical Doctor rather than a Computer Programmer. Perhaps he would be making the same argument about pharmaceutical patents?
  - super_mario 15y ago
    Are you seriously expecting Stallman or any one person to "fight" the government and prevent it from passing some draconian law. You seem to thoroughly misunderstand how a modern democracy operates. It's up to the people to prevent a government like that by not electing politicians that have draconian views on the subject. And the only way people can ever do that is if they are aware of all the issues. And Richard is doing a lot to make us all aware of the issues. In my mind he is doing all he can do, and at the right level of involvement, where he has the most know how to influence the minds of "regular" people.
    - jonhendry 15y ago
      Compare the FSF to the EFF.
      - stfp 15y ago
        They do different things? That are both needed and important?
  - noibl 15y ago
    The point is to make such laws unworkable through practical measures, not to generate political anger in the uncertain hope that that will balance the efforts of proprietorial lobbyists and state security extremists indefinitely.
spodek 15y ago
He co-authored a license that anyone can use to share software, prose, and other copyrightable material. That license, and others derived from it, are at the root of most non-proprietary software and many types of user-created content. Using the internet means you've used software that likely could not have been created without such licenses. Wikipedia is another example of something using a license derived from the one he helped create. Helping create flourishing communities of people legally sharing each others' work, collectively creating great works, influences legislation. Imagine if no licenses existed for people to legally remix each other's work without explicit permission. Disney, the MPAA, the RIAA, and others would have had greater ability to lengthen copyright terms, increase penalties for infringement, and so on. Microsoft had a strong play for extending from the desktop to servers when Unix was fragmented. I wonder what might have happened if apache didn't exist to compete with Microsoft -- how much more influence Microsoft might have had over U.S. legislation. He's done a lot more than just help write the GPL, but that alone contributed a lot.
- jonhendry 15y ago
  Yes, but what has he done that has been directed towards US laws, regulations, and policies, to protect the right to read?
  - _sh 15y ago
    Apart from better sanitation and medicine and education and irrigation and public health and roads and a freshwater system and baths and public order and a legal document designed to protect the right to read and modify and a philosophy that has influenced an entire generation of creators...?
  - bad_user 15y ago
    While I don't agree with the parent, as the BSD license and BSD-licensed software would have happened anyway, the GPL is the perfect example of what hackers can do against awful legislation. You see, the GPL takes the copyright system and turns it on its head. That's why it is named a copyleft license, an obvious pun. How does it do that? Well, copyright prevents distribution. The GPL rides this restriction and says that you may not distribute GPL-licensed software unless (1) you distribute it with no extra restrictions + (2) the distributed binary is either accompanied by source-code or the source-code is available on request. The GPL COULD NOT demand this if it weren't for the copyright law and in regards to freedom / protecting users rights, it works out great because nobody can abuse the GPL without legal repercussions. It's actually beautiful if you think about it and innovative - it enabled open-source / free software to really disrupt the software industry, creating the equivalent of the public commons. And this movement went viral and moved to books, music and movies. And this would have happened without the GPL, but on a much lower scale. The GPL is the spark that started the fire. BTW - to change the world you don't need to change the laws. The alternative is to make them obsolete and technology has a habit of doing that ;-)
cabalamat 15y ago
He was and is a major inspiration for the international pirate party movement, which if the power of the MAFIAA is to be destroyed, is the most likely actor to do it by political means.
anatoly 15y ago
It isn't that he wrote a scary story. It's that his story looked much less plausible in 1997 than it does now. I remember reading the story at that time. I thought it had something going for it, but was very far-fetched and unrealistic. 14 years later, it seems way more plausible.