Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Alexandre Oliva (lxo@gnusocial.net)'s status on Tuesday, 17-Jan-2023 06:02:03 JST Alexandre Oliva

   • Ed
   your assessment clearly follows from conflating the disparate concepts of freedom (control over one's own life) and power (control over others' lives)
   please stop confusing yourself and try to reason about them as the distinct concepts that they are, and you'll see how much of a difference that makes
   • Embed this notice
     Alexandre Oliva (lxo@gnusocial.net)'s status on Tuesday, 17-Jan-2023 07:14:23 JST Alexandre Oliva

     in reply to

     • Ed
     but are you free to use this tool to exercise power over others? say, use a magnet to extract coins from others' pockets? use a brick to throw (or threaten to throw) on whoever dares walk on the park?
   • Embed this notice
     Ed (peepstein@mstdn.social)'s status on Tuesday, 17-Jan-2023 07:14:24 JST Ed

     in reply to

     @lxo I think it is you who are confused. If I control my life, then when someone gives a tool to me, I should be “at liberty” to use it how I want, no? Once it is handed to me, I take it home, I “am free” to do with it as I wish? Give it to someone else for free? Sell it to someone else if I wish (this happens all the time in society)? An artist is given some sheet metal, they turn it into a sculpture, they sell the sculpture for money…

     翠星石 repeated this.
   • Embed this notice
     Alexandre Oliva (lxo@gnusocial.net)'s status on Tuesday, 17-Jan-2023 07:18:48 JST Alexandre Oliva

     in reply to

     • Ed
     now you're showing off your ignorance of the gpl, I'm sorry to say. that's not at all how supply chains of gpled software redistribution work. the license is granted by the copyright holders (who are given that power by law), not by whoever participates in the supply chain
     and, as false analogies go, copyright doesn't apply to metal per se. but the issue is not the legal issue of copyright, is it? we were talking about ethics and moral issues pertaining freedom.
   • Embed this notice
     Ed (peepstein@mstdn.social)'s status on Tuesday, 17-Jan-2023 07:18:49 JST Ed

     in reply to

     @lxo should every entity in the supply chain of that metal be entitled to the copyright of the sculpture? I say no they should not. In the world of copyleft, the given sheet metal comes with a condition that controls the lives and choices of the artist, saying that any sculpture that is made from the metal must become the property of everyone else who was involved in the supply chain. This makes zero sense in the context of freedom. It is the exercise of Power. Not Liberty.

     翠星石 repeated this.
   • Embed this notice
     Alexandre Oliva (lxo@gnusocial.net)'s status on Tuesday, 17-Jan-2023 07:40:53 JST Alexandre Oliva

     in reply to

     • Ed
     but the supply chain case that would match your description would be one in which intermediate suppliers each modified the original sculpture. in as much as the modified artworks are derivative works of earlier works under copyright, each intermediary and the end customer is subject to the original author's copyrights, and to those added in the supply chain. the situation is quite similar as long as you compare apples to apples
   • Embed this notice
     Ed (peepstein@mstdn.social)'s status on Tuesday, 17-Jan-2023 07:40:54 JST Ed

     in reply to

     @lxo yes you’re right. I was going to edit my post earlier to change copyright to the right to reproduce likenesses of the sculpture but I couldn’t be bothered. My point doesn’t change. Most reasonable people would expect the right to produce copies would rest with the sculptor alone, not alongside the entities who made the sheet metal.

     翠星石 repeated this.