Still no new license -- but draft text available

[Kalle A. Pahajoki]

Pat McCann <thisis at bboogguusss.org> wrote:
>It doesn't seem to me to have paid off.  I'd be interested in a better
>(but concise) explanation of +/- freedom.

In this case, it's probably my English skills that are to blame,
rather than my philosophy teacher. It's been around a year now since I took
that course, so my recollection is a bit sketchy, but I'll try to
clarify.

Negative freedom is the total freedom of any restrictions. The less
regulations, the more negative freedom you have. Plain and simple.

Positive freedom to do something means it is possible for one to do
something _in practice_.

Imagine two young persons, a black person of a poor family living in a
poor area and an average middle-class white person. Let's assume they are
of the same intelligence level. The black person goes to a school
whose level of teaching is very low and the white person goes to
an average public school with an OK level of teaching. 

When they are looking into their options of future education, do you
think it is reasonable to say that they have the same possibility to
get into an OK university and get an education in the field they find
interesting?[1]
Do you think they even have an equal chance of getting through high
school? 
It is clear that the black person (of same intelligence) does not have
an equal _positive freedom_ to pursue higher education. 

>I just find GNU's use of the term to be an arbritrary and
>unconventional use which is unfairly implies things about copyleft
>software that is true only of other forms of priceless software.

I've heard terms such as 'libre' software suggested to remedy this
situation. In Finnish, we have two different words for gratis  and free.
The situation is muddy. To what level does libre software imply free
of cost in itself? I think the GNU use of 'free software' to describe their
particular idea of free software is a minor complain (there are bigger
ones).

>> By writing a piece of free software and placing it under GPL, the
>> author is in a way protecting his right to the source code, much the
>
>Where "his right to the source code" means "his right to other people's
>source code". We're not complaining that you choose this form of
>self-slavery in which you DO find certain freedoms; we're complaining
>that you so often use "the" instead of "other people's"

The whole point is, that I choose to inflict this restriction on
myself and others who wish to use my source code. It is _my_ choice.
If it renders the source code unusable for you, then I can give you my
sympathy but no more. If I deem it right to use copyleft, then I must
have the right to do so. 
You could always ask the author to relicense
it with a less (to you) restrictive license. If you're arguments are
reasonable, then maybe the author will be too.

>and that
>YOU us the broad term "freedom" instead of your using your "positive
>freedom" and supplying a definition for the naive.

I could argue that YOU use the broad term "freedom" instead of your using
"negative freedom". You have the right to do so. GNU has the
same right, and they do tell what they mean by their use of the
term in their web page. 

IMHO It is silly to argue about the terms used, unless you are trying
to imply that it is a concious choice of confusing terminology to
further their marketing effort (or some other sinister motive). 

[1] In Finland, the universities most commonly consider a student's
senior high school grades (usually the average of specific subjects)
and the results of an exam similiar to the English A levels. You can
also be accept by just doing well in a test the Universities arrange.
(There are no tuitions)
Even this system is unfair to the person receiving inferior elementary
and high school education. A system based solely on tuitions is even more
unfair to the poor person. In general, the higher the cost of pursuing
higher education, the less equal chance a well-doing and a poor person
are of getting the same level of higher education.

-- 
Kalle Pahajoki <kalle at pahajoki.org>
"So many have said.  But her name is not mine.  Though maybe my doom
 will be not unlike hers." -- Arwen, in the World's Most Subtle Pick-Up Line
 (The favourite LotR quote of Mark Wells)