Re: [libreplanet-discuss] What do you think about the FSF using/endorsing nonfree cultural works?

[Daniel Pocock]

On 11/02/16 13:08, Fabio Pesari wrote:
> I know this is going to be controversial and I understand that the FSF
> is about software and not culture but in truth, I disagree with the
> FSF's (and the GNU project's) usage of nonfree cultural licenses (like
> the CC-BY-ND).
> 
> I disagree with the idea that things that express a subjective point of
> view do not have to be free. Some software expresses a subjective POV,
> and most art does: before copyright laws, all works of art, religion and
> science used to be technically free, but that didn't stop people from
> creating them!
> 
> The argument that using a free license lets a personal POV get "twisted"
> is faulty, because doing that is libellous (a crime) and I don't see
> anybody putting words in the mouths of Leo Tolstoy, Leonardo da Vinci
> and H.P. Lovecraft (all authors whose works are in the public domain).
> Attribution is not defamation!
> 


It is not just about defamation

People may actively work on something (e.g. a paper or some slides) to
promote a particular point of view (e.g. Free Software)

Somebody else may take 90% of the slides and just change 10% of them and
start using them to promote a similar point of view (e.g. Open Source)

Is the FSF using nonfree licenses as a tactic to prevent that?

It is an interesting question.  A software analogy would be Debian using
a nonfree license to stop Ubuntu, but then Debian wouldn't be Debian any
more.