Digression (was: Re: [WSIS CS-Plenary] PCT and WGIG)

[Georg C. F. Greve]

Dear Vittorio,

the thread about the FSF seems a digression on the discussion, as the
FSFs have neither claimed representativity for all of Free Software,
nor were the people selected by the PCT Working Group predominantly
From the FSFs.

Of course I very much appreciate your willingness to hear and learn
more about the Free Software Foundations, but think we better make
sure to not confuse issues, for which reason I modified the subject.


 || On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 11:36:00 +0100
 || Vittorio Bertola <vb at bertola.eu.org> wrote: 

 vb> Even now, we have plenty of different modifications of the
 vb> "free-as-in-free-speech" concept applied to intellectual objects,
 vb> and indeed the FSF one is different from Larry Lessig's one (on
 vb> the Creative Commons website, they say to have been "taking
 vb> inspiration in part from the Free Software Foundation's GNU
 vb> General Public License (GNU GPL)", which is exactly what I mean
 vb> by "modify") or from D.J.Bernstein's one.

You seem to be falling into the common trap of applying the ideas of
Free Software mechanically to everything, essentially inversely
repeating the mistake of "intellectual property."


Yes, the Creative Commons web site is different from the FSF. 

This is logical, because they are very different initiatives.

Lawrence Lessig -- who by the way happens to be on the board of the
Free Software Foundation in the United States -- started Creative
Commons in order to start and allow for a dialog that would one day
lead to the equivalent of Free Software in other fields.

Free Software on the other hand already has more than 20 years of
experience with the freedoms necessary for software. 

And while the Free Software Foundations are the oldest and most
experienced group and competence center in the field, they are in no
way all there is, nor have they made that claim.


 vb> Again, it seems to me that what you are saying is that 5'000
 vb> years of human evolution have ultimately lead to the concept of
 vb> "free software" as defined by the FSF, and now it's so perfect
 vb> that it can't be made better any more - and no one should dare
 vb> changing it or building something else on top of it.

Yes, the FSF is indeed the organisation that first crystallized those
5'000 years of human evolution into releasing a scientifically
hardened definition of Free Software.

Respect for that achievement and its experience as the oldest
organisation in the field of Free Software is the reason why the FSFs
are asked for advice and receive so much attention -- not any claims
to monopolisation of the Free Software idea, as you seem to imply.

Also, as people from the Free Software community and those who are
working with it will be able to tell you, the dialog about freedom in
software is in no way over, it is permanently ongoing and quite
lively.

So be assured that the Free Software community is in fact very much
alife and active intellectually.

Regards,
Georg

-- 
Georg C. F. Greve                                 <greve at fsfeurope.org>
Free Software Foundation Europe	                 (http://fsfeurope.org)
GNU Business Network                        (http://mailman.gnubiz.org)
Brave GNU World	                           (http://brave-gnu-world.org)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/pipermail/plenary/attachments/20050116/95b5b227/attachment.pgp