[Foundation-l] RfC: License update proposal

[Ray Saintonge]

Delirium wrote:
> Anthony wrote:
>   
>> My point of view is that the proposed license update is a violation of the
>> moral rights of the contributors.  If Mike is going to deny that moral
>> rights exist in the first place, then I feel the need to explain that they
>> do.
>>     
> The problem is that moral rights in your sense---i.e. not the legal 
> construct "moral rights" that exists in some countries' laws, but a more 
> general concept of morality as it relates to authorship---boils down to 
> settling philosophical debates on what constitutes a "right", what 
> "morality" is, and so on. You have some opinions on these matters, while 
> others have other opinions, and I certainly don't expect this mailing 
> list to be the place where centuries-long debates over what (if 
> anything) constitutes a "moral right" are resolved. So I'm not too sure 
> what the point of the discussion is.
>   
The only reason that "moral rights" is an issue is its inclusion in the 
statutes of various countries.  It mostly stems from an inflated 
Napoleonic view of the Rights of Man that was meant to replace the 
divine rights of kings.  Common law countries have been loath to embark 
in this direction.  Moral rights are mentioned in the US law, but only 
as a toothless tiger.

Ec