Universal human rights versus immorality of proprietary software

[Rui Miguel Seabra]

On Thu, 2003-06-05 at 01:54, Wouter Vanden Hove wrote:
> 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?

Hello,

I can't speak for the FSF, but I can give you my insight on this
subject.

You should have noticed that the Universal Human Rights are not just
_one_ article. If one opinion clashes with one right, but the other
clashes with many more, which one is more just?

Please read on... I know it's long, but not at all uninteresting, I
hope.

     Article 1.
     All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.They
     are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one
     another in a spirit of brotherhood.

How is writing non-free computer programs morally compatible with the
spirit of brotherhood?

     Article 2.
     Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in
     this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race,
     colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion,
     national or social origin, property, birth or other status.

How is selling abusingly expensive non-free computer programs morally
compatible with not making a distinction on whether you have enough
property ($)? Copying a computer program costs "zero", unlike copying a
car which needs factories.

     Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the
     political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or
     territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent,
     trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of
     sovereignty.

How are non-free software licenses that exclude some countries from
running a program compatible with not excluding someone based on the
international status of a country or territory s/he lives in?

     Article 3.
     Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

How are non-free software licenses, that remove freedom you normally
have under international Copyright law, compatible with everyone's right
to liberty?

     Article 4.
     No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave
     trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.

How are licenses like Sun's and IBM's jvm license, which will be able to
revoke your right to that copy if you have a judicial disagreement with
them, compatible with not being held in servitude?

     Article 5.
     No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or
     degrading treatment or punishment.

How is the massive propaganda, calling people who copy computer programs
"pirates", "terrorists" et all compatible with not being subject to
cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment?

     Article 7.
     All are equal before the law and are entitled without any
     discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to
     equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this
     Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.

     Article 9.
     No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.

     Article 11.
      (1) Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be
          presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a
          public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary
          for his defence.

      (2) No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of
          any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence,
          under national or international law, at the time when it was
          committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one
          that was applicable at the time the penal offence was
          committed.

     Article 12.
     No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his
     privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his
     honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of
     the law against such interference or attacks.

How are "software raids", where you have to prove your innocence of
illegal copying accusations, compatible with all being equal before the
law, which presumes you're innocent until proved guilty?

Consider David LaMacchia or Jon Johansson, for instance.

     Article 18.
     Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and
     religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or
     belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and
     in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in
     teaching, practice, worship and observance.

How are software patents compatible with the right to freedom of
thought?

     Article 19.
     Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this
     right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to
     seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media
     and regardless of frontiers.

How is Microsoft Frontpage's license compatible with the right to
freedom of opinion?

     Article 21.
      (1) Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his
          country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.
      (2) Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in
          his country.
      (3) The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of
          government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and
          genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal
          suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent
          free voting procedures.

How can there be equal access to public service when many of them demand
that you use non free computer programs (like Microsoft Windows and
Microsoft Internet Explorer) without any technical justification other
than incompetence or unrighteous influence?

     Article 26.
      (1) Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free,
          at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary
          education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional
          education shall be made generally available and higher
          education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of
          merit.
      (2) Education shall be directed to the full development of the
          human personality and to the strengthening of respect for
          human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote
          understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations,
          racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities
          of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.

How are software licenses that eventually teach your children that it is
bad to help their friends because you have to obey the owner a
contribute to the strengthening respect for human rights?

      (3) Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education
          that shall be given to their children.

     Article 27.
      (1) 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.

How can one freely participate in the cultural life of the community,
and enjoy and share both its scientific advancement and benefits if most
software licenses will last until they will probably be already dead and
buried by the time it becomes public domain?

      (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.

Ah, this one could be yours..., but you'll have to explain where Free
Software does not depend on it too. If it wasn't for it's dependence on
Copyright covering software, others would surely exploit and abuse one's
material interests...

     Article 28.
     Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which
     the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully
     realized.

DMCA, EUCD, software patents, increasing penalties for copyright and
patent infringement, etc... etc... the rights and freedoms set forth in
this Declaration are increasingly hard to be fully realised.

     Article 29.
      (1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free
          and full development of his personality is possible.
      (2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be
          subject only to such limitations as are determined by law
          solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect
          for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just
          requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare
          in a democratic society.

The principle of your freedom to stretch your arm ends where my freedom
to keep my nose intact begins.

      (3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary
          to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.


     Article 30.
     Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any
     State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to
     perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and
     freedoms set forth herein.

And finally, for the coup-fatale, your theory would fail because it
would engage in acts aimed at the destruction of some rights and
freedoms set forth herein.

I hope you had the patience to read this lengthy email :)

Yours, Rui
-- 
+ No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown
+ Whatever you do will be insignificant,
| but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi
+ So let's do it...?

Please AVOID sending me WORD, EXCEL or POWERPOINT attachments.
See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
-------------- 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/e5e6d7ba/attachment.sig>