Underfunding or why I am not interested

[Chris Travers]

Just a few clarifications for the record.  I will email you separately to
discuss disagreements offlist.


On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 12:56 AM, Aaron Wolf <wolftune at gmail.com> wrote:

> I know that this is not the place to get into complex licensing debate, I
> just want to add two simple points:
>
> 1. Chris, you seem to be essentially aligned with the Copyfree
> Initiative's position, which is one that is covered in article I linked to.
> It is a position that rejects proprietary restrictions along with copyleft
> restrictions. Therefore, it is intellectually consistent and respectable.
>

Relatively close.

>
> 2. In your article you state "The permissive licenses above have the
> advantage in that they pass downstream the right of those who do further
> development to fully own their work to the extent that society allows
> (through copyright law and the like).  The copyleft licenses are different
> in that they pass only limited rights to utilize downstream to further
> developers."
>
> That is misleading and partly inaccurate.
>

Only if you skimmed over the earlier parts.   I was careful to define
ownership, something most people don't do in such discussions.   Just to
refresh, I defined use as "the right to utilize, and direct utilization of,
an item, particularly in production of economic goods or services."

Again, going to to take further discussion off-list.  However I wanted to
correct what I thought was a clear misreading of what I wrote.

-- 
Best Wishes,
Chris Travers

Efficito:  Hosted Accounting and ERP.  Robust and Flexible.  No vendor
lock-in.
http://www.efficito.com/learn_more<http://www.efficito.com/learn_more.shtml>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sfconservancy.org/pipermail/npo-accounting/attachments/20140223/6302e5a6/attachment.html>