Home Categories Liked Watch later History About

Richard Stallman: Copyright vs. Community

Why it was recommended

RMS has historically viewed copyright as a bad thing[1], all the way from how it has developed historically to how it is applied uniformly to different kinds of works (practical works like software being copyrighted is of particular concern). Now, you might say that "the GPL uses copyright, which clearly means that RMS and the FSF are pro-copyright". They're not. Copyleft is a hack of the copyright system[2], specifically designed such that as copyright becomes stronger so does the amount of freedom provided by copyleft. This is explicitly the purpose. If it were not legal to stop users from modifying software, then the GPL would not need to exist (nor could it). RMS has stated[3] that his views on an ideal copyright system is: 1. Authors retain copyright, not publishers. This matches the original copyright law that was created in England under Queen Mary in The Statute of Anne (1710)[4]. 2. The scope of works covered would be reduced. Most importantly, practical works would not be covered under copyright. 3. The length of time that copyright applies to a work would be massively reduced. Works are being created today that children born today will never see in the public domain. The solution is to reduce the length of time that copyright applies to 10 years (or possibly 5, which some authors appear to prefer). 4. The breadth of restrictions would be reduced. Most notably, distribution of a work would no longer require permission from the owner. The argument for this change req

Referencecyphar · Original2017-11

What it covers

A 2012 lecture by Richard Stallman at Reykjavik University arguing that copyright, built for the printing press, fits poorly with computer networks. He criticizes draconian. It is for a general viewer who does not plan to take a prerequisite first.

Video details

Channel: RU Computer Science
Length: 2 hr 5 min
Year: 2013

Open on YouTube

More in this topic