Universal human rights versus immorality of proprietary software

[Simo Sorce]

On Thu, 2003-06-05 at 03:54, Wouter Vanden Hove wrote:
> Hi, 
> 
> In Article 27 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, there is
> stated 
> 
> (2) Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material
> interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production
> of which he is the author.
> http://reactor-core.org/universal-human-rights.html
> 
> How does this affect the FSF's viewpoint that writing proprietary
> software is immoral?

I'm not an FSF or FSFE member, but I would like to say a few words to
this provocation.

1. I don't think FSF have ever stated that proprietary software is
immoral. First of all, as software is an object not an action I hardly
see how it can be itself immoral.

2. The way many proprietary software companies behave may be seen as
immoral to some degree, as they put on you exaggerated limitations like
forbidding you to help a friend, fix bugs in software you have paid for,
be free to use the software for whatever are your needs.

You reported point 2 but if you look at point 1 of artcile 27 of the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights it say:
"Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of
the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement
and its benefits"

Free Software among other things give you 2 things fundamental things
needed to fulfill this right in the field of software.

1. Freedom to study the code
2. Freedom to modify the code and redistribute it

Point 1 fulfill the "Everyone has the right freely to participate in the
cultural life of the community" part of point 1 of article 27.
Point 2 is fulfill the "to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific
advancement and its benefits" part of point 2 of article 27.

To both source code is a prerequisite and the freedom given by free
software a necessity to respect point 1.

Proprietary software do not permit you neither to study nor to modify
the software to grow in scientific advancement.

Just not to forgot article 2, Free Software is perfectly OK with it.
Both Copyleft and non copyleft Free Software, strongly preserve moral
rights, and let the author choose how to "protect" their material
interest.

Hope this clarifies a bit what I think are key point benefits of Free
Software.

Simo Sorce.

-- 
Simo Sorce - simo.sorce at xsec.it
Xsec s.r.l. - http://www.xsec.it
via Durando 10 Ed. G - 20158 - Milano
mobile: +39 329 328 7702
tel. +39 02 2399 7130 - fax: +39 02 700 442 399
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.fsfe.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20030605/cafded3e/attachment.sig>