[Foundation-l] Blogs vs. Wikis, Copyleft vs. Copycenter
meta.sj at gmail.com
Sun Apr 15 03:36:22 UTC 2007
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> On 4/14/07, Samuel Klein <meta.sj at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Most definitions of 'free' still include life-plus-seventy copyleft,
>> likewise a compromise of freedom.
> Copyleft a compromise of freedom as is the prohibition against killing
> anyone you think looks ugly.
I'm not sure these are parallel.
I hope we can agree that "life plus seventy" is broken; anything that
works through a broken system supports it tacitly.
> Do you honestly that it's wrong for a person to ask for realistically
> compromised because he won't endorse the absolutist sort of freedom in
> pure anarchy? Or are you just pooing on copyleft in order to look
I don't mean to disparage copyleft, though I do hope the related movements
stop inheriting mistakes from copyright. Copyleft, like copyright, is a
valid and useful expression of authorial intent. Since it imposes a
subset of the restrictions of default copyright, it is surely 'freer' in
But it isn't what I think of when I think of freedom, since by definition
copyleft exists to impose restrictions on others, for as long as legally
I have myself published material under both copyright and copyleft
licenses. I would not in the future use any license that doesn't
explicitly revert to a public domain or attribution or "tell-me" license
in a reasonable period of time. Reasonableness varies with context and
author; for me, not more than a few years for code and highly reusable
work, and a few more for complete works.
And when it comes to globally shared knowledge-bases such as Wikipedia,
intended for the broadest possible uptake, I feel much better about
publishing my contributions into the public domain (and encourage others
to do the same).
More information about the foundation-l