[License-discuss] For Public Comment: The Libre Source License

[Christopher Sean Morrison]

> You are trying to state copyright law in reverse, presuming the right to control culture and science is natural and any limitations on that (such as the protection of privacy rights) is a restriction.  The participation in and protection of culture and science in article 27 seems pretty focused on public activities, not private ones.

That’s not what I read.  The point was specifically about having put labor into something one is choosing to share, subject to terms, something which they do not have to share, and which is not any commentary on reverse copyright law or law of any sort.  I don’t know where I’d stand on it with respect to intellectual property, but it certainly applies to physical property:

Here, you can have X, so long as you never Y (publicly or privately).  Here have this gun, so long as you never shoot anyone (publicly or privately).  Oh you shot someone?  Then we’re going to take it away from you now.

If that’s too extreme, conditions on estate and inheritance seem to be to exhibit similar performance properties.  It’s a moral superiority question, your personal liberty to do what you want vs my ability to stipulate how my efforts and creations are used.

That all said, I DON’T think it’s in the best interest of society to encourage or endorse private-use restrictions, particularly with respect to society's advancement, but it’s a really bold leap (in my opinion) to presume private activities are morally superior to a right to control ones own creations.  I can see it being a really slippery slope towards defining what actually constitutes “private" use.

> I do not believe copyright holders have any legitimate reason to be granted the ability to regulate private activities, and believe the law within each country should clarify private activities as outside copyright.

This is a bit of a “No True Scotsman” fallacy.  Some will certainly feel that having put their own labor into making something is perfectly -legitimate- grounds for imposing terms.  That is literally the premise.

Cheers!
Sean