Re: [Fsfe-uk] Liberated software

[Sam Liddicott]

Chris Croughton wrote:

> If it didn't have that specific meaning, yes.  But I doubt that the FSF
> would like me using it for the licences on my software.  If they would
> like to withdraw that requirement, and use 'copyleft' to include the
> BSD, Zlib and other licences which they consider 'free', I think it
> would catch on very well and get a good following from people in other
> fields (like authors, most authors I know aren't all that bothered about
> copyright but their agents and the agents' lawyers are less flexible).
> I know quite a number of songwriters and composers who support
> 'copyleft' in that sense with their IP as well (like composers pre-1800,
> they regard imitation, parody and other 'modification' as a form of
> flattery, not as a threat).
>  
If copyleft has the more generic meaning then perpetual copyleft would 
be the original meaning. This would both me more clear as well as give 
the ability to more easily capture the public imagination and come up 
with a broad label to identify the philosophy behind sharing in the same 
way that the vague term "creative commons license" is beginning to.

Perpetual copylleft sounds more noble than copyleft and this would 
surely be an asset for the FSF, would it make it worth them diluting the 
old meaning in order to get more coverage for the concept and thus also 
more covereage and recognition for perpetual copyleft than they 
currently have for "copyleft"? Sort of like having one floor our of a 
popular city hotel instead of a motel in the country?

Is there any potential in this idea?

Sam