[Nottingham] Android Freedoms - Or lack of?
martin at ml1.co.uk
Wed Sep 21 12:08:52 UTC 2011
On 21 September 2011 08:35, Jason Irwin <jasonirwin73 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 20/09/11 19:07, Martin wrote:
>> Is Android really free software?
> Heh. Caught that, not had a chance to read the articles yet.
> I finished his book whilst on holiday and it's interesting. His views
> on software patents etc and the general concept of freedoms I can agree
> with. He appears to have some rather twisted views on how science works
> (maybe things are different in the USA?). I think he is totally wrong
> on copyright. I do not understand why he thinks that it is 'OK' to
> trade the work of another without remuneration, that society has some
> inalienable right to take a persons work and not reward them for it.
> Sorry, but that is just so wrong on so many levels that I do not know
> where to begin.
I'm working my way through as time permits. He does have a very clear
if a little harsh a writing style.
> Of course, that does not mean that the copyright system isn't abused
> because it sure as heck is; and that also does not mean that copyright
> shouldn't be limited to some sensible term. But really, being able to
> copy any work in full and pass it around? No, sorry. Wrong.
Well... Looks like the media/music/film industry have recently lobbied
hard (expensively) enough to abuse the system yet further to a term of
SEVENTY YEARS for the EU...
> I was very interested to read the essays on the GPL. It seems that the
> "...blah de blah and licensed under GPLv3, or any later version..." is
> merely a suggestion to include in the license notice and not actually
> part of the license itself. So one is free to include it or not.
Interesting. However, as discussed, that suggestion actually goes
against some of what rms himself advocates...
> Of course, maybe I'm wrong in all the above (I often am).
> Can't make tonight due to other commitments, normal service should
> resume in a fortnight.
More information about the Nottingham