[pp.int.general] Richard Stallman's interview

[Carlos Ayala]

We in Partido Pirata have always had a trouble defining this part of our platform. We are aware that as contents and works that have to be ruled by author's rights and not by patents, both software rights and culture rights issues have to be managed within the author's rights scope -as Rick says, in a culture-and-knowledge perspective-.

However, in spite of they belong to the same scope, we think that they are not exactly the same -as we may think of software as a tool which implements an idea to fulfill some functionalities; in the other hand, culture is not a tool anymore, but more like a sophisticated language which captures the essence of a person, the essence of a collective, even the essence of Nature-. Although cultural works may have a purpose -for instance, entertainment-, they don't really have to have a purpose; however, software always have a purpose -for instance, aiding people to create cultural works :)-.

So in Partido Pirata we think it's not a trivial issue -at least it has not been trivial for us-, and we would be willing to discuss it in Berlin; we think that if it's discussed by fellow pirates, we'll reach an agreement that will both bring a common stance for the international platform, and help us in Spain to finish our Culture and Author's RIghts platform. Regards,


                                                                                    Carlos Ayala
                                                                                    ( Aiarakoa )

                                                            Partido Pirata National Board's Chairman

----- Mensaje original ----
De: Rick Falkvinge (Piratpartiet) <rick at piratpartiet.se>
Enviado: lunes, 21 de enero, 2008 13:13:41
2008/1/21, Комиссия по подготовке Учредительного Конвента

> > <piratenpartai at gmail.com>:

> > http://pirateparty.ru/content/view/148/31/   (Eng)

> > http://pirateparty.ru/content/view/149/31/   (Rus)

> We discussed RMS' desire at length and found it had two basic flaws:
>
> 1) Creating an arbitrary division between software and non-software is no longer possible or realistic in the age of
> electronic music. Remember that RMS has a software-only perspective on copyright; ours needs to be a
> culture-and-knowledge perspective.
>
> 2) Creating an arbitrary division between source code and non-source code is no longer possible, especially in the age
> of .Net and Java where you can regenerate the original source on the fly from binaries. If you were to require
> companies to submit source code in a certain language, when they did not WANT to do so, you would get the most
> obfuscated horror imaginable that would be way worse than a first-stage automated decompile of the binary, but still
> fulfills the technical demand of being in that certain language and compiling to that exact binary.
> 
> The only thing RMS' proposal would accomplish is a taxpayer-funded repository of illegible, obfuscated
> good-for-nothing code and a payroll to administer it




       
______________________________________________ 
Web Revelación Yahoo! 2007:
Premio Favorita del Público. 
http://es.promotions.yahoo.com/revelacion2007/favoritos/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.pirateweb.net/pipermail/pp.international.general/attachments/20080122/81b67b6c/attachment.htm