On Saturday 26 September 2009 07:10:11 Steve Fosdick wrote:
> The way I see this the creator of a creative work including software,
> music etc. has various rights which include being identified as the
> creator and determining who may copy or use the work, for what purpose
> and how it may be adapted. These rights are enshrined in copyright law.
I am not taking a position by posting any of the following.
Crudely worded, seems to me that the FSF's position is that copyright law got
it wrong when it comes to functional works like code and that the creator
does not or should not have these rights over the work. The GPL with the
Freedoms it mentions and the copyleft it embodies is an attempt in their
minds to put the put the wrongs of copyright right. (Couldn't resist the bit
of word play. Hopefully it is still clear.)
Crosbie Fitch over at Digital Productions (if I get him right and can express
it correctly in summary form) holds that there are Natural Rights when it
comes to Intellectual Property but that they are not what is generally
believed and that copyright law does not so much protect these rights that a
creator does have but rather gives monopoly powers that the creator should
not have. http://www.digitalproductions.co.uk/
> So, when we are talking about free software it is very likely the
> creator is happy for others to create patches but to be completely sure
> we must check which license applies and the terms of that license.
When I speak of Free Software, I am referring to software with one of the
accepted Free licenses. If it is gratis and not libre, I generally refer to
it as freeware but the topic does not often come up these days in my neck of
the woods.
all the best,
drew
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Received on Sat Sep 26 16:15:14 2009
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Sep 26 2009 - 16:15:14 EEST