Re: [Commons-Law] Russell McOrmond on Commodore 64 Freedom
Via: "Mahesh T. Pai"
ANIRBAN MAZUMDER said on Wed, Dec 27, 2006 at 07:50:59AM +0000,:
> Complete nonsense! What is this gibberish all about, Seth?
Seth is blabbering some strange and exotic thing called freedom. It is
freedom to use the chattels you own (becaue you paid for them) the way
you want to.
This is about my kid's right to repeat the experiment I once did with
an old transistor radio. I took it apart and reassembled it. I was
left two or three transistors and a working radio. (we still use it).
This is about everybody elses' freedom to do what I did with that
transistor radio with my computer, cellphone, audio player, television
and whatever.
This is about our freedom to access our data we store in our computers
(and every other electronic gadget) which we purchased by paying
(either before or after the fact) our hard earned money.
This is refusal to bond knowledge to some faceless corproate entity.
This is about Freedom to control our own lives; our own property, our
own information.
And though Freedom is such an useless, obsolete thing, people never
learn from history. Several wars have have been fought, several lives
have been laid down, for the sake of freedom. Even in India, one
hawkish bania named Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi (who would have been
better off if he had donned the turban and stuck to his family
business of money-lending instead of going off to Durban and doing
ending up doing arbitration) and hundereds of others before, and after
him laid down their life for it.
But alas!!! what use? Idiots like Seth keep on talking about freedom.
Some guys still actually fight for it. Seth?? Are you listening? Will
you please!!???
Freedom is a strange thing, is it not?
> ANIRBAN MAZUMDER
> LECTURER IN LAW
> NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF JURIDICAL SCIENCES
> NUJS BHAVAN
> 12 LB BLOCK
> SALT LAKE CITY
> CALCUTTA - 700098
> INDIA
> PH -00- 91-33-23350534 (O)
> 23357379 (O)
> 25216734 ( R)
> FAX -00- 91-33-23357422
>
>
>
>
>
> >From: Seth Johnson
> >To: a2k@lists.essential.org,
> >e-commerce@lists.essential.org,upd-discuss@lists.essential.org,
> >commons-law@sarai.net
> >CC: russell@flora.ca
> >Subject: [Commons-Law] Russell McOrmond on Commodore 64 Freedom
> >Date: Mon, 25 Dec 2006 20:55:37 -0500
> >
> >
> >(While I like the freedom to tinker line, I'm inclined to say his
> >lead message should be his point about the right to own a
> >computer. What's really on the line is the right to own a device
> >that performs logical operations, which is the same as to say
> >from a slightly different direction, the right to benefit from
> >copyright and use information productively. -- Seth)
> >
> >-------- Original Message --------
> >Subject: Re: [d@DCC] The Commodore 64 continuum: "open source"
> >hardware...
> >Date: Mon, 25 Dec 2006 20:03:07 -0500 (EST)
> >From: Russell McOrmond
> >To: General Copyright Discussions
> >
> >
> >
> >Sending a letter in reply to an article from earlier this month:
> >http://www.itbusiness.ca/it/client/en/home/News.asp?id=41320
> >
> >---------- Forwarded message ----------
> >Date: Mon, 25 Dec 2006 20:00:55 -0500
> >From: Russell McOrmond
> >To: sschick
> >Subject: Re: The Commodore 64 continuum: "open source"
> >hardware...
> >
> >
> > I am a fan of the Commodore 64. My Apple II clone, my Vic
> >20, and my Commodore 64 all had 65xx processors in them, and each
> >one came with full schematics of the hardware with the manuals.
> >One of my jobs in the late 80's and early 90's was as a certified
> >Commodore repair person for Eastern Ontario, a job where the
> >skills were self-taught.
> >
> > We are heading to a situation where the old-economy music
> >labels, movie studies, and proprietary software vendors are
> >colluding with hardware manufacturers and misinformed governments
> >to legalize and legally protect the concept of "no owner
> >modifiable parts inside". They want to take away our right to
> >tinker, even disallowing computer owners from making our own
> >software choices.
> >
> > How I learned computing, both hardware and software, is
> >increasingly being considered illegal.
> >
> > I believe that governments must firmly reject this attack on
> >property, creative, educational and other rights. We should be
> >going the other way by mandating that hardware manufacturers
> >provide adequate documentation to hardware owners so we can
> >author our own software to share if we wish. No exclusive right,
> >whether copyright or patents, should ever be allowed on
> >interfaces. The property rights of hardware owners should always
> >trump the extremism that has allowed hardware manufacturers to
> >treat their customers as a threat rather than the very people who
> >drive the future of computing.
> >
> > I sit here on Christmas day thinking of Christmas past where I
> >was given some of this hardware. I feel sad that children
> >approximately 20 years later will not be able to receive the same
> >level of gift that will benefit them in their future.
ANIRBAN MAZUMDER said on Wed, Dec 27, 2006 at 07:50:59AM +0000,:
> Complete nonsense! What is this gibberish all about, Seth?
Seth is blabbering some strange and exotic thing called freedom. It is
freedom to use the chattels you own (becaue you paid for them) the way
you want to.
This is about my kid's right to repeat the experiment I once did with
an old transistor radio. I took it apart and reassembled it. I was
left two or three transistors and a working radio. (we still use it).
This is about everybody elses' freedom to do what I did with that
transistor radio with my computer, cellphone, audio player, television
and whatever.
This is about our freedom to access our data we store in our computers
(and every other electronic gadget) which we purchased by paying
(either before or after the fact) our hard earned money.
This is refusal to bond knowledge to some faceless corproate entity.
This is about Freedom to control our own lives; our own property, our
own information.
And though Freedom is such an useless, obsolete thing, people never
learn from history. Several wars have have been fought, several lives
have been laid down, for the sake of freedom. Even in India, one
hawkish bania named Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi (who would have been
better off if he had donned the turban and stuck to his family
business of money-lending instead of going off to Durban and doing
ending up doing arbitration) and hundereds of others before, and after
him laid down their life for it.
But alas!!! what use? Idiots like Seth keep on talking about freedom.
Some guys still actually fight for it. Seth?? Are you listening? Will
you please!!???
Freedom is a strange thing, is it not?
> ANIRBAN MAZUMDER
> LECTURER IN LAW
> NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF JURIDICAL SCIENCES
> NUJS BHAVAN
> 12 LB BLOCK
> SALT LAKE CITY
> CALCUTTA - 700098
> INDIA
> PH -00- 91-33-23350534 (O)
> 23357379 (O)
> 25216734 ( R)
> FAX -00- 91-33-23357422
>
>
>
>
>
> >From: Seth Johnson
> >To: a2k@lists.essential.org,
> >e-commerce@lists.essential.org,upd-discuss@lists.essential.org,
> >commons-law@sarai.net
> >CC: russell@flora.ca
> >Subject: [Commons-Law] Russell McOrmond on Commodore 64 Freedom
> >Date: Mon, 25 Dec 2006 20:55:37 -0500
> >
> >
> >(While I like the freedom to tinker line, I'm inclined to say his
> >lead message should be his point about the right to own a
> >computer. What's really on the line is the right to own a device
> >that performs logical operations, which is the same as to say
> >from a slightly different direction, the right to benefit from
> >copyright and use information productively. -- Seth)
> >
> >-------- Original Message --------
> >Subject: Re: [d@DCC] The Commodore 64 continuum: "open source"
> >hardware...
> >Date: Mon, 25 Dec 2006 20:03:07 -0500 (EST)
> >From: Russell McOrmond
> >To: General Copyright Discussions
> >
> >
> >
> >Sending a letter in reply to an article from earlier this month:
> >http://www.itbusiness.ca/it/client/en/home/News.asp?id=41320
> >
> >---------- Forwarded message ----------
> >Date: Mon, 25 Dec 2006 20:00:55 -0500
> >From: Russell McOrmond
> >To: sschick
> >Subject: Re: The Commodore 64 continuum: "open source"
> >hardware...
> >
> >
> > I am a fan of the Commodore 64. My Apple II clone, my Vic
> >20, and my Commodore 64 all had 65xx processors in them, and each
> >one came with full schematics of the hardware with the manuals.
> >One of my jobs in the late 80's and early 90's was as a certified
> >Commodore repair person for Eastern Ontario, a job where the
> >skills were self-taught.
> >
> > We are heading to a situation where the old-economy music
> >labels, movie studies, and proprietary software vendors are
> >colluding with hardware manufacturers and misinformed governments
> >to legalize and legally protect the concept of "no owner
> >modifiable parts inside". They want to take away our right to
> >tinker, even disallowing computer owners from making our own
> >software choices.
> >
> > How I learned computing, both hardware and software, is
> >increasingly being considered illegal.
> >
> > I believe that governments must firmly reject this attack on
> >property, creative, educational and other rights. We should be
> >going the other way by mandating that hardware manufacturers
> >provide adequate documentation to hardware owners so we can
> >author our own software to share if we wish. No exclusive right,
> >whether copyright or patents, should ever be allowed on
> >interfaces. The property rights of hardware owners should always
> >trump the extremism that has allowed hardware manufacturers to
> >treat their customers as a threat rather than the very people who
> >drive the future of computing.
> >
> > I sit here on Christmas day thinking of Christmas past where I
> >was given some of this hardware. I feel sad that children
> >approximately 20 years later will not be able to receive the same
> >level of gift that will benefit them in their future.
comments
No new comments allowed (anymore) on this post.