[FM Discuss] updated IBD

[Camille Acey/FLOSS Manuals]

Daniel,

I think you're operating with a fundamental misunderstanding of Free. Free
is un-ripoff-able.

"What Is Free Culture?" - http://questioncopyright.org/what_is_free_culture

That said, not sure why you're having this argument here and now in the
midst of people who've committed their lives to Free Software and Free
Culture. It's futile.

Camille

>
> Message: 5
> Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2012 16:24:44 +0100
> From: Daniel James <daniel.james at sourcefabric.org>
> To: adam <adam at flossmanuals.net>
> Cc: discuss at lists.flossmanuals.net
> Subject: Re: [FM Discuss] updated IBD
> Message-ID: <4FF1BD3C.8090501 at sourcefabric.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Hi Adam,
>
> > i think i wont reply any more as this is a little dull.
>
> If something you've worked on gets ripped off, you won't find the
> subject dull at all.
>
> > if you believe in free content/source code you cannot drive a wedge
> > between free and free-but-not-for-commercial...
>
> That's not what I'm saying; I'm saying that there is a distinction
> between ethical and unethical use, and when use is unethical there often
> seems to be a commercial motivation.
>
> I agree that banning commercial use is not the solution, because it
> limits the ability of Free culture authors to sustain themselves.
> However I totally understand why independent creators put out their
> content under no-commercial-use licenses. Not all of us are tenured
> academics or highly-paid lawyers.
>
> Cheers!
>
> Daniel
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.flossmanuals.net/pipermail/discuss-flossmanuals.net/attachments/20120702/04bc6b2e/attachment.htm>