rmsrmsrms

3 ms·

1.
by rmsrmsrms 10y ago
Your contract is worse than marriage (no divorce), and a terrible strawman. Lifelong written contract with a stranger? Ugh. What if I change my mind? I'll just continue releasing things permissively, and gradually abolish copyright
2.
by rmsrmsrms 10y ago
It's a bit of a one-sided contract (I'm giving up way more than you). And signing a contract just means more unnecessary men with guns, whereas we could just make and share and use creative works and that would be that. If you a
3.
by rmsrmsrms 10y ago
Art expresses something ineffable about the self of the artist. Or at least this works for me, so far.
4.
by rmsrmsrms 10y ago
Sure, ok. Just to be clear, since it's possibly unclear, I wasn't claiming 5 myself.
5.
by rmsrmsrms 10y ago
If you need copyright law, you need men with guns to enforce the law. If you need men with guns to enforce the GPL, is that really freedom? The public domain and licenses that approximate it (3-BSD) do not suffer from this problem. Elimin
6.
by rmsrmsrms 10y ago
I was just trying to outline specifically what was bogus about his argument. That claim 4 is pure speculation is a pretty serious flaw. At no point did I make a comment about the conference - I don't even know what I think about it.
7.
by rmsrmsrms 10y ago
I think the argument he makes consists of several claims: 1) black people are an ethnic group or race // exact terminology and semantics is debatable 2) being black means you have a lower IQ (on average) // true in the U
8.
by rmsrmsrms 10y ago
> By "free as in free speech" we mean the same thing as when we say "free as in freedom". If it's freedom, why does the GPL need copyright law?