summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/digital-inclusion-in-freedom.html
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/digital-inclusion-in-freedom.html')
-rw-r--r--talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/digital-inclusion-in-freedom.html1072
1 files changed, 1072 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/digital-inclusion-in-freedom.html b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/digital-inclusion-in-freedom.html
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c7078d0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/digital-inclusion-in-freedom.html
@@ -0,0 +1,1072 @@
+<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+<!-- Parent-Version: 1.90 -->
+<title>Is Digital Inclusion a Good Thing? How Can We Make Sure It Is?
+- GNU Project - Free Software Foundation</title>
+<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/digital-inclusion-in-freedom.translist" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+<h2>Is Digital Inclusion a Good Thing? How Can We Make Sure It Is?</h2>
+
+<address class="byline">by
+<a href="http://www.stallman.org/">Richard Stallman</a></address>
+
+<p><em>This essay was first published in the proceedings of the ITU's 2009
+Kaleidoscope conference in Mar del Plata, Argentina.</em></p>
+<hr class="thin" />
+
+<h3 id="intro">INTRODUCTION</h3>
+
+<p>Digital information and communication technology offers the
+possibility of a new world of freedom. It also offers possibilities
+of surveillance and control which dictatorships of the past could only
+struggle to establish. The battle to decide between these
+possibilities is being fought now.</p>
+
+<p>Activities directed at &ldquo;including&rdquo; more people in the
+use of digital technology are predicated on the assumption that such
+inclusion is invariably a good thing. It appears so, when judged
+solely by immediate practical convenience. However, if we judge also
+in terms of human rights, the question of whether digital inclusion is
+good or bad depends on what kind of digital world we are to be
+included in. If we wish to work towards digital inclusion as a goal,
+it behooves us to make sure it is the good kind.</p>
+
+<p>The digital world today faces six major threats to users' freedom:
+surveillance, censorship, proprietary software, restricted formats,
+software as a service, and copyright enforcement. A program to
+promote &ldquo;digital inclusion&rdquo; must take account of these
+threats, so as to avoid exposing its intended beneficiaries to them.
+First we look at the nature of these threats; then we propose measures
+to resist them, collectively and individually.</p>
+
+<h3 id="surveillance">SURVEILLANCE</h3>
+
+<p>Digital surveillance systems are spreading. The UK uses computers
+with cameras to track all car travel. China plans to identify and
+photograph everyone that uses an Internet cafe.<a name="tex2html1"
+href="#foot100"><sup>1</sup></a></p>
+
+<p>Cell phones are Big Brother's tools. Some can be activated by
+remote command to listen to the user's conversations without giving
+any sign of listening, by the police<a name="tex2html3"
+href="#foot101"><sup>2</sup></a> and by unauthorized
+individuals.<a name="tex2html5" href="#foot102"><sup>3</sup></a> Users
+are unable to stop this because the software in the phone is not
+free/libre, thus not under the users' control.</p>
+
+<p>Cell phones also localize the user, even when set to
+&ldquo;idle.&rdquo; The phone network needs to know roughly where the
+phone is located in order to communicate with it, and can easily
+record that information permanently. However, networks are designed
+to locate phones far more accurately by triangulation. They can do it
+even better with GPS in the phone, with or without the user's
+consent.</p>
+
+<p>In many countries, universal digital surveillance does not record
+what you say, only who you talk with. But that is enough to be quite
+dangerous, since it allows the police to follow social networks. If a
+known dissident talks with you by phone or email, you are a candidate
+for labeling as a dissident. It is no use ceasing to communicate by
+phone or email with fellow dissidents when a dictator takes power,
+because his secret police will have access to records of your past
+communications.</p>
+
+<p>The European Union mandates keeping records of all phone calls and
+email for periods up to two years. The stated purpose of this
+surveillance is to &ldquo;prevent terrorism.&rdquo; Bush's illegal
+surveillance of phone calls also cited this purpose.
+Non-state-sponsored terrorism is a real danger in a few countries, but
+the magnitude is often exaggerated; more people died in the US in
+September 2001 from car accidents than from terrorism, but we have no
+Global War on Accidents. By contrast, the practice of labeling
+political opposition as &ldquo;terrorists,&rdquo; and using supposed
+&ldquo;anti-terror&rdquo; laws to infiltrate and sabotage their
+activities, threatens democracy everywhere. For instance, the US
+Joint Terrorism Task Force infiltrated a wide range of political
+opposition groups.<a name="tex2html7"
+href="#foot103"><sup>4</sup></a></p>
+
+<p>False accusations of &ldquo;terrorism&rdquo; are standard practice
+for suppressing political opposition. In the US, protesters who
+smashed windows at the 2008 Republican National Convention were
+charged with &ldquo;terrorism.&rdquo;<a name="tex2html9"
+href="#foot104"><sup>5</sup></a> More recently, Iran described
+protesters demanding a new election as
+&ldquo;terrorists.&rdquo;<a name="tex2html11"
+href="#foot105"><sup>6</sup></a> The generals who ruled most of South
+America in the 1970s offered precisely that justification for their
+systematic murder of dissidents.<a name="tex2html13"
+href="#foot20"><sup>7</sup></a></p>
+
+<p>A free society does not guarantee anonymity in what you do outside
+your home: it is always possible that someone will notice where you
+went on the street, or that a merchant will remember what you bought.
+This information is dispersed, not assembled for ready use. A
+detective can track down the people who noticed you and ask them for
+it; each person may or may not say what he knows about you. The
+effort required for this limits how often it is done.</p>
+
+<p>By contrast, systematic digital surveillance collects all the
+information about everyone for convenient use for whatever purpose,
+whether it be marketing, infiltration, or arrest of dissidents.
+Because this endangers the people's control over the state, we must
+fight against surveillance whether or not we oppose current government
+policies. Given the surveillance and tracking which cell phones do, I
+have concluded it is my duty to refuse to have one, despite the
+convenience it would offer. I have few secrets about my own travels,
+most of which are for publicly announced speeches, but we need to
+fight surveillance even if it is established while we have no
+particular secrets to keep.</p>
+
+<p>The UK car travel surveillance system has already been used against
+political dissidents.<a name="tex2html14"
+href="#foot106"><sup>8</sup></a></p>
+
+<h3 id="censorship">CENSORSHIP</h3>
+
+<p>When the topic of Internet censorship is mentioned, people are
+likely to think of China, but many supposedly freedom-respecting
+countries have imposed censorship. Denmark's government has blocked
+access to a secret list of web pages. Australia's government wants to
+do likewise, but has met strong resistance, so instead it has
+forbidden links to a long list of URLs. Electronic Frontiers
+Australia was forced, under threat of fines of AUD 11,000 per day, to
+remove a link to an anti-abortion political web
+site.<a name="tex2html16" href="#foot107"><sup>9</sup></a> Denmark's
+secret list of forbidden URLs was leaked and posted on Wikileaks; that
+page is now on Australia's banned list.<a name="tex2html18"
+href="#foot108"><sup>10</sup></a> Germany is on the verge of launching
+Internet censorship.<a name="tex2html20"
+href="#foot109"><sup>11</sup></a></p>
+
+<p>Censorship of the contents of web sites is also a threat. India
+just announced a broad plan of censorship that would effectively
+abolish freedom of the press on the Internet.<a name="tex2html22"
+href="#foot110"><sup>12</sup></a></p>
+
+<p>Some European countries censor particular political views on the
+Internet. In the United States, people have been imprisoned as
+&ldquo;terrorists&rdquo; for running a web site which discussed
+actions taken against experiments on animals.<a name="tex2html24"
+href="#foot28"><sup>13</sup></a></p>
+
+<p>Another common excuse for censorship is the claim that
+&ldquo;obscene&rdquo; works are dangerous. I agree that some works
+are obscene; for instance, the gruesome violence in the movie Pulp
+Fiction revolted me, and I will try never to see such a thing again.
+But that does not justify censoring it; no matter how obscene a work
+may be, censorship is more so. A variant of this excuse is
+&ldquo;protecting children,&rdquo; which plays to the exaggerated and
+mostly misplaced fears of parents.<a name="tex2html25"
+href="#foot111"><sup>14</sup></a></p>
+
+<p>Censorship is nothing new. What is new is the ease and
+effectiveness of censorship on electronic communication and
+publication (even where a few wizards have ways to bypass it). China
+in 1960 achieved effective censorship by cutting its population off
+from the world, but that held back the country's development, which
+was painful for the regime as well as for the population. Today China
+uses digital technology to achieve effective political censorship
+without cutting itself off in other ways.<a name="tex2html27"
+href="#foot112"><sup>15</sup></a></p>
+
+<h3 id="control">SOFTWARE YOU CAN'T CONTROL</h3>
+
+<p>In order for computer users to have freedom in their own computing
+activities, they must have control over the software they use. This
+means it must be <em>free software</em>, which I here call
+&ldquo;free/libre&rdquo; so as to emphasize that this is a matter of
+freedom, not price.</p>
+
+<p>A program is free/libre if it gives the user these four essential
+freedoms:<a name="tex2html29" href="#foot113"><sup>16</sup></a></p>
+
+<ul>
+<li>0. Freedom to run the program as you wish.</li>
+
+<li>1. Freedom to study the source code, and change it to make the
+program do what you wish.</li>
+
+<li>2. Freedom to redistribute and/or republish exact copies. (This
+is the freedom to help your neighbor.)</li>
+
+<li>3. Freedom to distribute and/or publish copies of your modified
+versions. (This is the freedom to contribute to your community.)</li>
+</ul>
+
+<p>When software is free/libre, the users control what it does. A
+non-free or <em>proprietary</em> program is under the control of its
+developer, and functions as an instrument to give the developer
+control over the users. It may be convenient, or it may not, but
+in either case it imposes on its users a social system that keeps them
+divided and helpless. Avoiding this injustice and giving users
+control over their computing requires the four freedoms. Freedoms 0
+and 1 give you control over your own computing, and freedom 3 enables
+users to work together to jointly control their computing, while
+freedom 2 means users are not kept divided.<a name="tex2html31"
+href="#foot114"><sup>17</sup></a></p>
+
+<p>Many argue that free/libre software is impossible on theoretical
+economic grounds. Some of them misinterpret free/libre software as
+&ldquo;gratis software&rdquo;; others understand the term correctly,
+but either way they claim that businesses will never want to develop
+such software. Combining this with a theoretical premise such as
+&ldquo;Useful software can only be developed by paying
+programmers,&rdquo; they conclude that free software could never
+exist. This argument is typically presented elliptically in the form
+of a question such as, &ldquo;How can programmers make a living if
+software is free?&rdquo; Both premises, as well as the conclusion,
+contradict well-known facts; perhaps the elliptical questions are
+meant to obscure the premises so people will not compare them with the
+facts.</p>
+
+<p>We know that free software can be developed because so much of it
+exists. There are thousands of useful free
+programs,<a name="tex2html34" href="#foot115"><sup>18</sup></a> and
+millions of users<a name="tex2html36"
+href="#foot116"><sup>19</sup></a> run the
+GNU/Linux<a name="tex2html38"
+href="#foot117"><sup>20</sup></a>operating system. Thousands of
+programmers write useful free software as
+volunteers.<a name="tex2html40" href="#foot118"><sup>21</sup></a>
+Companies such as Red Hat, IBM, Oracle, and Google pay programmers to
+write free software. I do not know even approximately how many paid
+free software developers there are; studying the question would be
+useful. Alexandre Zapolsky of the free software business event Paris
+Capitale du Libre (<a
+href="http://web.archive.org/web/20140402120239/http://paris-libre.org/">http://www.paris-libre.org</a>) said
+in 2007 that the free software companies of France had over 10,000
+employees.</p>
+
+<p>Most computer users use proprietary software, and are accustomed to
+letting a few companies control their computing. If you are one of
+them, you may have accepted the view that it is normal and proper for
+those companies, rather than you, to have control. You may also
+believe that &ldquo;reputable&rdquo; developers will not use their
+power to mistreat you. The fact is that they do.</p>
+
+<p>Microsoft Windows has features to spy on the
+user,<a name="tex2html43" href="#foot119"><sup>22</sup></a> Digital
+Restrictions Management (DRM) features designed to stop the user from
+making full use of his own files,<a name="tex2html45"
+href="#foot120"><sup>23</sup></a> and an all-purpose back door with
+which Microsoft can forcibly change the software in any way at any
+time.<a name="tex2html47" href="#foot121"><sup>24</sup></a> Microsoft
+can alter any software, not just its own.<a name="tex2html49"
+href="#foot122"><sup>25</sup></a> Cell phones tied to particular phone
+networks may give the network a similar back door. MacOS also has DRM
+features designed to restrict the user.</p>
+
+<p>The only known defense against malicious features is to insist on
+software that is controlled by the users: free/libre software. It is
+not a perfect guarantee, but the alternative is no defense at all. If
+code is law, those governed by it must have the power to decide what
+it should say.</p>
+
+<h3 id="protocols">RESTRICTED FORMATS</h3>
+
+<p>Restricted file formats impose private control over communication
+and publication. Those who control the formats control, in a general
+sense, society's use of information, since it can't be distributed or
+read/viewed without their permission.</p>
+
+<p>For instance, text files are often distributed in the secret
+Microsoft Word format, which other developers have only imperfectly
+been able to decode and implement. This practice is comparable to
+publishing books in a secret alphabet which only officially approved
+scribes know how to read. Italian public television (RAI) distributes
+video in VC-1 format, whose specifications are available only under
+nondisclosure agreement from the Society of Motion Picture and
+Television Engineers. (As of 2016 RAI seems to have shifted to
+a non-secret format.) Ironically, the SMPTE states this in a Word file,
+which is not suitable to cite as a reference.<a name="tex2html51"
+href="#foot123"><sup>26</sup></a> This standard has been partly
+decoded through reverse engineering.</p>
+
+<p>Most music distribution on the Internet uses the patented MP3
+format<a name="tex2html82" href="#foot137"><sup>42</sup></a>, and most
+video uses patented MPEG-4 formats such as DIVX and H.264. VC-1 is
+also patented.<a name="tex2html53" href="#foot124"><sup>27</sup></a>
+Any software patent directly attacks every user's freedom to use her
+computer. Use of patented data formats is comparable to mandating
+that people use officially approved scribes rather than do their own
+reading and writing. Patents on MPEG formats have been used to attack
+and threaten developers and distributors of programs that can handle
+these formats, including free/libre programs. Some distributors of
+the GNU/Linux system, for instance Red Hat, do not dare to include
+support for these programs.</p>
+
+<p>A restricted format is a trap; any and all use of the format has
+the effect of pushing computer users into the trap. Inclusion in
+dependence on these formats is not a step forward.</p>
+
+<h3 id="saas">SOFTWARE AS A SERVICE</h3>
+
+<p>Typical proprietary software gives you only a binary, whose actions
+are controlled by the developer, and not by you. A new practice
+called &ldquo;software as a service,&rdquo; or &ldquo;SaaS,&rdquo;
+gives you even less control. With SaaS you don't even get a copy of
+the program you can run. Instead, you send your data to a server, a
+program runs there, and the server sends you back the result. If
+users have a binary, they could reverse-engineer it and patch it if
+they are really determined. With SaaS, they can't even do that.</p>
+
+<p>Reverse engineering being so difficult, perhaps software as a
+service is little worse than proprietary software. The point,
+however, is that it is no better. For users to have control of their
+computing, they must avoid SaaS just as they must avoid proprietary
+software.</p>
+
+<p>For the preparation of this paper I was invited to use an IEEE site
+called <a href="http://pdf-express.org">pdf-express.org</a> to convert
+my PDF file into one with the embedded fonts required for the
+conference proceedings. Looking at that site, I concluded that it was
+an instance of software as a service, and therefore I should not use
+it. Another strike against it is that it requires users to identify
+themselves, which is gratuitous surveillance.</p>
+
+<p>It's not that I'm specifically worried that this site is malicious.
+I cannot trust the IEEE implicitly, since I disapprove of its
+restrictions on redistributing the papers it publishes, but there is
+little scope in that particular site's job for intentional
+mistreatment of its users (aside from the gratuitous surveillance).
+However, the point is not whether this particular site abuses its
+power. The point is that we should not let ourselves become
+accustomed to granting others that sort of power over us. The habit
+of handing over control of our computing to others is a dangerous one.
+The way to resist the practice is to refuse invitations to follow
+it.</p>
+
+<p>The only way to maintain your control over your computing is to do
+it using your own copy of a free/libre program.</p>
+
+<h3 id="copyright">COPYRIGHT AND SHARING</h3>
+
+<p>The biggest conflict over freedom in the Internet is the War on
+Sharing: the attempt by the publishing industry to prevent Internet
+users from enjoying the capability to copy and share information.</p>
+
+<p>Copyright was established in the age of the printing press as an
+industrial regulation on the business of writing and publishing. The
+aim was to encourage the publication of a diversity of written works.
+The means used was to require publishers to get the author's
+permission to publish recent writings. This enabled authors to get
+income from publishers, which facilitated and encouraged writing. The
+general reading public received the benefit of this, while losing
+little: copyright restricted only publication, not the things an
+ordinary reader could do, so it was easy to enforce and met with
+little opposition. That made copyright arguably a beneficial system
+for the public, and therefore legitimate.</p>
+
+<p>Well and good&mdash;back then.</p>
+
+<h4 id="waronsharing">The War on Sharing</h4>
+
+<p>Nowadays, computers and networks provide superior means for
+distributing and manipulating information, including published
+software, musical recordings, texts, images, and videos. Networks
+offer the possibility of unlimited access to all sorts of
+data&mdash;an information utopia.</p>
+
+<p>The works that people use to do practical jobs, such as software,
+recipes, text fonts, educational works and reference works, must be
+free/libre so that the users can control (individually and
+collectively) the jobs that they do with these works. That argument
+does not apply to other kinds of works, such as those which state what
+certain people thought, and artistic works, so it is not ethically
+obligatory for them to be free/libre. But there is a minimum freedom
+that the public must have for all published works: the freedom to
+share exact copies noncommercially. Sharing is good; sharing creates
+the bonds of society. When copying and sharing a book was so
+difficult that one would hardly ask such a large favor, the issue of
+freedom to share was moot. Today, the Internet makes sharing easy,
+and thus makes the freedom to share essential.</p>
+
+<p>One obstacle stands in the way of this utopia: copyright. Readers
+and listeners who make use of their new ability to copy and share
+published information are technically copyright infringers. The same
+law which formerly acted as a beneficial industrial regulation on
+publishers has now become a restriction on the public it was meant to
+benefit.</p>
+
+<p>In a democracy, a law that prohibits a popular and useful activity
+is usually soon relaxed. Not so where corporations have more political
+power than the public. The entertainment companies' lobby is
+determined to prevent the public from taking advantage of the power of
+their computers, and has found copyright a suitable tool. Under their
+influence, rather than relaxing copyright rules to permit productive
+and free use of the Internet, governments have made it stricter than
+ever, forbidding the act of sharing.</p>
+
+<p>The publishers and their friendly governments would like to go to
+any length they can get away with to wage the War on Sharing. In the
+US, the record companies' legal arm (the RIAA) regularly sues
+teenagers for hundreds of thousands of dollars, and one sharer was
+fined almost two million.<a name="tex2html56"
+href="#foot125"><sup>28</sup></a> The French government recently
+passed a law (HADOPI) to abolish the principle of due process of law,
+by punishing Internet users with disconnection on the mere accusation
+of copying. Only certain selected, government-approved organizations
+were empowered to make such accusations; thus, this law meant to
+abolish Libert&eacute;, Egalit&eacute;, and Fraternit&eacute; with one
+blow.
+<span class="gnun-split"></span>The law was rejected as unconstitutional by the Constitutional
+Council.<a name="tex2html58" href="#foot126"><sup>29</sup></a> (It was
+subsequently changed, introducing a sham trial, to make it acceptable.) A
+similar law in New Zealand was withdrawn this year after public
+protests. The European Parliament recently voted against imposing
+similar injustice on the whole European Union, but the EU's weak form
+of democracy does not give Parliament the final decision. Some would
+like to go even further: a UK member of parliament proposed ten years'
+imprisonment for noncommercial sharing.</p>
+
+<p>The US, Canada, the European Union, and various other countries are
+engaged in negotiating the &ldquo;Anti-Counterfeiting Trade
+Agreement.&rdquo; The negotiations are secret, but Canada reluctantly
+published a list of suggestions it received from private parties, and
+HADOPI-style punishment without trial was one of
+them.<a name="tex2html60" href="#foot127"><sup>30</sup></a> The
+suggestion is likely to have come from the copyright lobby, which has
+great influence in the US government and others, so the danger is not
+negligible. European officials may seek to use this treaty to
+circumvent the European Parliament, following a practice known as
+&ldquo;policy laundering.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>The corporations that profit most from copyright legally exercise
+it in the name of the authors (most of whom actually gain little).
+They would have us believe that copyright is a natural right of
+authors, and that we the public must suffer it no matter how painful
+it is. They call sharing &ldquo;piracy,&rdquo; equating helping your
+neighbor with attacking a ship.</p>
+
+<p>Public anger over these measures is growing, but it is held back by
+propaganda. Terms such as &ldquo;piracy,&rdquo;<a name="tex2html62"
+href="#foot128"><sup>31</sup></a> &ldquo;protecting authors&rdquo; and
+&ldquo;intellectual property,&rdquo;<a name="tex2html64"
+href="#foot129"><sup>32</sup></a> and claims that reading, viewing or
+listening to anything without paying is &ldquo;theft,&rdquo; have
+convinced many readers that their rights and interests do not count.
+This propaganda implicitly assumes that publishers deserve the special
+power which they exercise in the name of the authors, and that we are
+morally obliged to suffer whatever measures might be needed to
+maintain their power.</p>
+
+<h4 id="digitalrestrictionsmanagement">Digital restrictions
+management</h4>
+
+<p>The publishers aim to do more than punish sharing. They have
+realized that by publishing works in encrypted formats, which can be
+viewed only with software designed to control the users, they could
+gain unprecedented power over all use of these works. They could
+compel people to pay, and also to identify themselves, every time they
+wish to read a book, listen to a song, or watch a video. They could
+make people's copies disappear on a planned schedule. They could even
+make copies unreadable at will, if they have all-purpose back-doors
+such as found in Windows, or special features for the
+purpose.<a name="tex2html66" href="#foot130"><sup>33</sup></a></p>
+
+<p>Designing products and media to restrict the user is called Digital
+Restrictions Management, or DRM.<a name="tex2html68"
+href="#foot66"><sup>34</sup></a> Its purpose is an injustice: to deny
+computer users what would otherwise be their legal rights in using
+their copies of published works. Its method is a second injustice,
+since it imposes the use of proprietary software.</p>
+
+<p>The publishers gained US government support for their dream of
+total power with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 (DMCA).
+This law gave publishers power, in effect, to write their own
+copyright rules, by implementing them in the code of the authorized
+player software. Even reading or listening is illegal when the
+software is designed to block it.</p>
+
+<p>The DMCA has an exception: it does not forbid uses that qualify as
+&ldquo;fair use.&rdquo; But it strips this exception of practical
+effect by censoring any software that people could use to do these
+things. Under the DMCA, any program that could be used to break
+digital handcuffs is banned unless it has other comparably important
+&ldquo;commercially significant&rdquo; uses. (The denial of validity
+to any other kind of significance, such as social or ethical
+significance, explicitly endorses business' domination of society.)
+Practically speaking, the limited right to disobey your software
+jailer is meaningless since the means to do so is not available.</p>
+
+<p>Similar software censorship laws have since been adopted in the
+European Union, Australia, and New Zealand, and other countries.
+Canada has tried to do this for several years, but opposition there
+has blocked it. The publishers' lobbies seek to impose these
+restrictions on all countries; for instance, the US demands them in
+trade treaties. WIPO (the World &ldquo;Intellectual Property&rdquo;
+Organization) helps, by promoting two treaties whose sole point is to
+require laws such as these. Signing these treaties does no good for a
+country's citizens, and there is no good reason why any country should
+sign them. But when countries do sign, politicians can cite
+&ldquo;compliance with treaty obligations&rdquo; as an excuse for
+software censorship.</p>
+
+<p>We still have the same old freedoms in using paper books and other
+analog media. But if e-books replace printed books, those freedoms
+will not transfer. Imagine: no more used book stores; no more lending
+a book to your friend; no more borrowing one from the public
+library&mdash;no more &ldquo;leaks&rdquo; that might give someone a
+chance to read without paying. No more purchasing a book anonymously
+with cash&mdash;you can only buy an e-book with a credit card, thus
+enabling computerized surveillance&mdash;and public libraries become
+retail outlets. That is the world the publishers want for us. If you
+buy the Amazon Kindle (we call it the <a
+href="/philosophy/why-call-it-the-swindle.html">Swindle</a>)
+or the Sony Reader (we
+call it the Shreader for what it threatens to do to books), you pay to
+establish that world.</p>
+
+<h3 id="supportingartists">SUPPORTING THE ARTS</h3>
+
+<p>The publishers tell us that a War on Sharing is the only way to
+keep art alive. Supporting the arts is a desirable goal, but it could
+not justify these means. Fortunately, it does not require them
+either. Public sharing of copies tends to call attention to obscure
+or niche works: when Monty Python put its video files on the net for
+download, its sales increased by a factor of over
+200.<a name="tex2html69" href="#foot131"><sup>35</sup></a> Meanwhile,
+digital technology also offers new ways to support the arts.</p>
+
+<h4 id="donations">Donations</h4>
+
+<p>The singer Jane Siberry offers her music for
+download through her own web site, called <a name="tex2html71"
+href="http://janesiberry.com">janesiberry.com</a> in 2010, allowing people to pay
+whatever amount they wish. The average price paid per song was earlier
+reported to be more than the $.99 that the major
+record companies charge.<a name="tex2html72"
+href="#foot132"><sup>36</sup></a></p>
+
+<p>Bestsellers also can still do well without stopping people from
+sharing. Stephen King got hundreds of thousands of dollars selling a
+serialized unencrypted e-book with no technical obstacle to sharing of
+copies. Radiohead made millions in 2007 by inviting fans to copy an
+album and pay what they wished, while it was also shared on the
+Internet. In 2008, Nine Inch Nails released an album with permission
+to share copies and made 750,000 dollars in a few
+days.<a name="tex2html74" href="#foot133"><sup>37</sup></a></p>
+
+<p>Even hampered by today's inconvenient methods of sending money to
+artists, voluntary contributions from fans can support them. Kevin
+Kelly, former editor of Wired Magazine, estimates the artist need only
+find approximately 1,000 true fans in order to earn a living from
+their support.<a name="tex2html76"
+href="#foot134"><sup>38</sup></a></p>
+
+<p>But when computer networks provide an easy anonymous method for
+sending someone a small amount of money, without requiring a credit
+card, voluntary support for artists will become far more effective.
+Every player could have a button you can press, &ldquo;Click here to
+send the artists one dollar.&rdquo; (The optimal amount may vary
+between countries; in India, one rupee might be a better choice.)
+Wouldn't you press it, at least once a week?</p>
+
+<p>Why, today, would you hesitate to send one dollar to an artist,
+once a week or even once a day? Not because you would miss the
+dollar, but because of the inconvenience of sending it. Remove the
+inconvenience, and voluntary support for artists will soar.</p>
+
+<h4 id="tax">Tax-based support</h4>
+
+<p>Another way to support the arts is with tax funds: perhaps with a
+special tax on blank media or Internet connectivity, or with general
+revenue.<a name="tex2html78" href="#foot135"><sup>39</sup></a> If this
+is to succeed in supporting artists, the state should distribute the
+tax money directly and entirely to them, and make sure it cannot under
+any pretext be taken from them by publishers such as record companies.
+Thus, in order to design this tax system to achieve the valid goal of
+&ldquo;supporting the arts,&rdquo; we must first reject the misguided
+goal of &ldquo;compensating the rights-holders.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>The state should not distribute this tax money in linear proportion
+to popularity, because that would give most of it to superstars,
+leaving little to support all the other artists. I therefore
+recommend using a function whose derivative is positive but tends
+towards zero, such as cube root. With cube root, if superstar A has
+1000 times the popularity of successful artist B, A will get 10 times
+as much money as B. (A linear system would give A 1000 times as much
+as B.) This way, although each superstar still gets a larger share
+than other artists, the superstars together will get only a small
+fraction of the funds, so that the system can adequately support a
+large number of fairly popular artists. This system would use its
+funds efficiently for the support of art.</p>
+
+<p>I propose this system for art because art is where the controversy
+is. There is no fundamental reason why a tax-based system should not
+also be used to support functional works that ought to be free/libre,
+such as software and encyclopedias, but there is a practical
+difficulty in doing so: it is common for those works to have thousands
+of coauthors, and figuring out the right way to divide the funds among
+them might be difficult even with the cooperation and generosity of
+everyone involved. Fortunately it appears not to be necessary to
+solve this problem, because people already put so much effort into
+developing free/libre functional works.</p>
+
+<p>Francis Muguet<a name="tex2html80" href="#foot79"><sup>40</sup></a>
+and I have developed a new proposal called the M&#233;c&#233;nat
+Global (or Global Patronage) which combines the idea of tax-support
+and voluntary payments.<a name="tex2html81"
+href="#foot136"><sup>41</sup></a> Every Internet subscriber would pay
+a monthly fee to support certain arts that are shared on the Internet.
+Each user could optionally divide up to a certain maximum portion of
+her fee among her choice of works; the funds for each work would be
+divided among the creative contributors to the work (but not the
+publishers). The totals thus assigned to various artists would also
+provide a measure of each artist's popularity. The system would then
+distribute the rest of the money on the basis of that popularity,
+using a cube-root or similar tapering-off function.</p>
+
+<h3 id="makingitgood">MAKING DIGITAL INCLUSION GOOD</h3>
+
+<p>The paper so far describes the factors that can make digital
+inclusion good or bad. These factors are part of human society and
+subject to our influence. Beyond just asking whether and when digital
+inclusion is a good thing, we can consider how to make sure it is
+good.</p>
+
+<h4 id="legally">Defending freedom legally</h4>
+
+<p>Full victory over the threats to digital freedom can only be
+achieved through changes in laws. Systematic collection or retention
+of information on any person using computers and/or networks should
+require a specific court order; travel and communication within any
+country should normally be anonymous. States should reject censorship
+and adopt constitutional protections against it. States should
+protect their computing sovereignty by using only free software, and
+schools should teach only free software in order to carry out their
+mission to educate good citizens of a strong, free and cooperating
+society.</p>
+
+<p>To respect computer users' freedom to operate their computers,
+states should not allow patents to apply to software or (more
+generally) using computers in particular ways. States should mandate
+their own use of freely implementable, publicly documented formats for
+all communication with the public, and should lead the private sector
+also to use only these formats. To make copyright acceptable in the
+network age, noncommercial copying and sharing of published works
+should be legal. Commercial use of DRM should be prohibited, and
+independently developed free software to access DRM formats should be
+lawful.</p>
+
+<p>To make these changes in laws happen, we need to organize. The
+Electronic Frontier Foundation (<a href="http://eff.org">eff.org</a>)
+campaigns against censorship and surveillance. End Software Patents
+(<a href="http://endsoftpatents.org">endsoftpatents.org</a>) campaigns against
+software patents. The Free Software Foundation campaigns against DRM
+through the site
+<a href="http://DefectiveByDesign.org">DefectiveByDesign.org</a>.</p>
+
+<h4 id="personally">Defending freedom personally</h4>
+
+<p>While we fight these legislative battles, we should also personally
+reject products and services designed to take away our freedom. To
+resist surveillance, we should avoid identifying ourselves to web
+sites unless it is inherently necessary, and we should buy things
+anonymously&mdash;with cash, not with bank cards. To maintain control
+of our computing, we should not use proprietary software or software
+as a service.</p>
+
+<p>Above all, we should never buy or use products that implement DRM
+handcuffs unless we personally have the means to break them. Products
+with DRM are a trap; don't take the bait!</p>
+
+<h4 id="others">Defending others' freedom</h4>
+
+<p>We can take direct action to protect others' freedom in the digital
+world. For instance, we can remove the passwords from our wireless
+networks&mdash;it is safe, and it weakens government surveillance
+power. (The way to protect the privacy of our own Internet
+communications, to the extent that it is possible, is with end-to-end
+encryption.) If others use enough of the bandwidth to cause actual
+inconvenience, we need to protect ourselves, but we can try gentle
+methods first (such as talking with the neighbors, or setting a
+password occasionally for a day or two), and keep the option of a
+permanent password as a last resort.</p>
+
+<p>When we publish, we should grant the users of our work the freedoms
+they deserve, by applying an explicit license appropriate to the type
+of work. For works that state your thoughts or observations, and
+artistic works, the license should permit at least noncommercial
+redistribution of exact copies; any Creative Commons license is
+suitable. (I insisted on such a license for this article.) Works
+that do functional jobs, such as software, reference works and
+educational works, should carry a free/libre license that grants users
+the four freedoms.</p>
+
+<h4 id="inclusioninfreedom">Inclusion in freedom</h4>
+
+<p>In our efforts to help others in practical ways, we must avoid
+doing them harm at a deeper level. Until freedom is generally assured
+in Internet use, projects for digital inclusion must take special care
+that the computing they promote is the freedom-respecting kind. This
+means using free/libre software&mdash;certainly not Windows or MacOS.
+This means using free, documented formats, without DRM. It also means
+not exposing the supposed beneficiaries to surveillance or censorship
+through the computing practices to which they are being
+introduced.</p>
+
+<h3 id="footnotes">Footnotes</h3>
+
+<dl>
+<dt id="foot100">&hellip; cafe.<a
+ href="#tex2html1"><sup>1</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>See
+ <a
+ href="http://www.cecc.gov/publications/commission-analysis/beijing-requires-photo-registration-at-all-internet-cafes-by">http://www.cecc.gov/publications/commission-analysis/beijing-requires-photo-registration-at-all-internet-cafes-by</a>.
+
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot101">&hellip; police<a
+ href="#tex2html3"><sup>2</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>See
+ <a
+ href="http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2006/12/remotely_eavesd_1.html">http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2006/12/remotely_eavesd_1.html</a>.
+
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot102">&hellip; individuals.<a
+ href="#tex2html5"><sup>3</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>See
+ <a
+href="http://www.newarkspeaks.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5379">
+http://www.newarkspeaks.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5379</a>.
+
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot103">&hellip; groups<a
+ href="#tex2html7"><sup>4</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>See
+ <a
+ href="https://www.aclu.org/fbi-jttf-spying">http://www.aclu.org/fbi-jttf-spying</a>.
+
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot104">&hellip; &ldquo;terrorism.&rdquo;<a
+ href="#tex2html9"><sup>5</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>See
+ <a
+ href="http://democracynow.org/2008/9/4/eight_members_of_rnc_activist_group">http://democracynow.org/2008/9/4/eight_members_of_rnc_activist_group</a>.
+
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot105">&hellip; &ldquo;terrorists.&rdquo;<a
+ href="#tex2html11"><sup>6</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>See
+ <a
+ href="http://web-old.archive.org/web/20160722044945/http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=7891929">
+http://abcnews.go.com/international/story?id=7891929</a>.
+
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot20">&hellip; dissidents.<a
+ href="#tex2html13"><sup>7</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>See the documentary, Condor: the First War on
+ Terror, by Rodrigo V&aacute;squez (2003).
+
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot106">&hellip; dissidents.<a
+ href="#tex2html14"><sup>8</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>See
+ <a
+ href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/whos_watching_you/8064333.stm">http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/whos_watching_you/8064333.stm</a>.
+
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot107">&hellip; site.<a
+ href="#tex2html16"><sup>9</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>See
+ <a
+ href="http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/302161/watchdog_threatens_online_rights_group_11k_fine?fp=16&amp;fpid=1">http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/302161/watchdog_threatens_online_rights_group_11k_fine?fp=16&amp;fpid=1</a>.
+
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot108">&hellip; list.<a
+ href="#tex2html18"><sup>10</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>See
+ <a
+ href="https://www.smh.com.au/technology/banned-hyperlinks-could-cost-you-11-000-a-day-20090317-gdtf8j.html">https://www.smh.com.au/technology/banned-hyperlinks-could-cost-you-11-000-a-day-20090317-gdtf8j.html</a>.
+
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot109">&hellip; censorship.<a
+ href="#tex2html20"><sup>11</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>See <a
+ href="http://netzpolitik.org/2009/the-dawning-of-internet-censorship-in-germany/">http://netzpolitik.org/2009/the-dawning-of-internet-censorship-in-germany/</a>.
+
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot110">&hellip; Internet.<a
+ href="#tex2html22"><sup>12</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>See <a
+ href="http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/Govt-gearing-up-to-gag-news-websites/articleshow/4562292.cms">http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/Govt-gearing-up-to-gag-news-websites/articleshow/4562292.cms</a>.
+
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot28">&hellip; animals.<a
+ href="#tex2html24"><sup>13</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>I support medical research
+ using animals, as well as abortion rights. Our defense of political
+ freedom should not be limited to causes we agree with.
+
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot111">&hellip; parents.<a
+ href="#tex2html25"><sup>14</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>See
+ <a
+ href="http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/article24476581.html">
+ http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/article24476581.html</a>.
+
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot112">&hellip; ways.<a
+ href="#tex2html27"><sup>15</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>See
+ <a
+ href="https://www.networkworld.com/article/2255678/20-years-after-tiananmen--china-containing-dissent-online.html">
+ http://www.networkworld.com/article/2255678/lan-wan/20-years-after-tiananmen--china-containing-dissent-online.html</a>.
+
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot113">&hellip; freedoms:<a
+ href="#tex2html29"><sup>16</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>See <a
+ href="/philosophy/free-sw.html">http://gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html</a>.
+
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot114">&hellip; divided.<a
+ href="#tex2html31"><sup>17</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>See
+ <a
+ href="/philosophy/why-free.html">http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/why-free.html</a> and
+ <a
+ href="/philosophy/shouldbefree.html">http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/shouldbefree.html</a> for other
+ arguments.
+
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot115">&hellip; programs,<a
+ href="#tex2html34"><sup>18</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>See
+ <a
+ href="http://directory.fsf.org">http://directory.fsf.org</a>.
+
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot116">&hellip; users<a
+ href="#tex2html36"><sup>19</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>See
+ <a
+ href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_adoption">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_adoption</a>.
+
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot117">&hellip; GNU/Linux<a
+ href="#tex2html38"><sup>20</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>See <a
+ href="/gnu/gnu-linux-faq.html">http://gnu.org/gnu/gnu-linux-faq.html</a>.
+
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot118">&hellip; volunteers.<a
+ href="#tex2html40"><sup>21</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>See
+ <a
+ href="/philosophy/fs-motives.html">http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/fs-motives.html</a>
+ for some of their motives.
+
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot119">&hellip; user,<a
+ href="#tex2html43"><sup>22</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>See <a
+href="https://web.archive.org/web/20160313214751/http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/08/21/spotify_worse_than_the_nsa/">
+https://web.archive.org/web/20160313214751/http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/08/21/spotify_worse_than_the_nsa</a>.
+
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot120">&hellip; files,<a
+ href="#tex2html45"><sup>23</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>See
+ <a
+ href="http://badvista.org">http://badvista.org</a>.
+
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot121">&hellip; time.<a
+ href="#tex2html47"><sup>24</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>See
+ <a
+ href="http://www.informationweek.com/microsoft-updates-windows-without-user-permission-apologizes/d/d-id/1059183">http://www.informationweek.com/microsoft-updates-windows-without-user-permission-apologizes/d/d-id/1059183</a>.
+
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot122">&hellip; own.<a
+ href="#tex2html49"><sup>25</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>See
+ <a
+ href="http://voices.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2009/05/microsoft_update_quietly_insta.html">http://voices.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2009/05/microsoft_update_quietly_insta.html</a>.
+
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot123">&hellip; reference.<a
+ href="#tex2html51"><sup>26</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>The standard in machine-readable form
+ is only available to be &ldquo;leased&rdquo;;
+ <a
+ href="http://www.smpte.org/sites/default/files/IndividualLicenseAgreementforSMPTE_EngineeringDocuments.pdf">
+http://www.smpte.org/sites/default/files/IndividualLicenseAgreementforSMPTE_EngineeringDocuments.pdf</a>.
+
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot124">&hellip; patented.<a
+ href="#tex2html53"><sup>27</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>See
+ <a
+href="http://web.archive.org/web/20120307122114/http://www.mpegla.com/Lists/MPEG%20LA%20News%20List/Attachments/176/n_06-08-17_pr.pdf">
+http://www.mpegla.com/Lists/MPEG%20LA%20News%20List/Attachments/176/n_06-08-17_pr.pdf</a> (archived).
+
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot125">&hellip; million.<a
+ href="#tex2html56"><sup>28</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>See
+ <a
+ href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/06/jammie-thomas-retrial-verdict.ars">http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/06/jammie-thomas-retrial-verdict.ars</a>.
+
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot126">&hellip; Council.<a
+ href="#tex2html58"><sup>29</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>See
+ <a
+ href="http://www.laquadrature.net/fr/hadopi-is-dead-three-strikes-killed-by-highest-court">http://www.laquadrature.net/fr/hadopi-is-dead-three-strikes-killed-by-highest-court</a>.
+
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot127">&hellip; them.<a
+ href="#tex2html60"><sup>30</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>See
+ <a
+ href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2008/11/canadian-wish-list-for-secret-acta-treaty-long-varied.ars">http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2008/11/canadian-wish-list-for-secret-acta-treaty-long-varied.ars</a>.
+
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot128">&hellip; &ldquo;piracy,&rdquo;<a
+ href="#tex2html62"><sup>31</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>See
+ <a
+ href="/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html">gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html</a>.
+
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot129">&hellip; property,&rdquo;<a
+ href="#tex2html64"><sup>32</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>See
+ <a
+ href="/philosophy/not-ipr.html">http://gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.html</a> for why this propaganda
+ term is harmful.
+
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot130">&hellip; purpose.<a
+ href="#tex2html66"><sup>33</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>See <a
+ href="http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html">http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html</a>.
+
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot66">&hellip; DRM.<a
+ href="#tex2html68"><sup>34</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>Those publishers, in an act of doublespeak, call it &ldquo;Digital
+ Rights Management&rdquo;.
+
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot131">&hellip; 200.<a
+ href="#tex2html69"><sup>35</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>See
+ <a
+ href="http://www.boingboing.net/2009/01/23/monty-pythons-free-w.html">http://www.boingboing.net/2009/01/23/monty-pythons-free-w.html</a>.
+
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot132">&hellip; charge.<a
+ href="#tex2html72"><sup>36</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>See
+ <a
+ href="http://www.37signals.com/svn/posts/419-jane-siberrys-you-decide-what-feels-right-pricing">http://www.37signals.com/svn/posts/419-jane-siberrys-you-decide-what-feels-right-pricing</a>.
+
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot133">&hellip; days.<a
+ href="#tex2html74"><sup>37</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>See
+ <a
+ href="http://www.boingboing.net/2008/03/05/nine-inch-nails-made.html">http://www.boingboing.net/2008/03/05/nine-inch-nails-made.html</a>.
+
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot134">&hellip; support.<a
+ href="#tex2html76"><sup>38</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>See
+ <a
+ href="http://www.kk.org/thetechnium/archives/2008/03/1000_true_fans.php">http://www.kk.org/thetechnium/archives/2008/03/1000_true_fans.php</a>.
+
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot135">&hellip; revenue.<a
+ href="#tex2html78"><sup>39</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>See <a
+ href="/philosophy/dat.html">http://gnu.org/philosophy/dat.html</a>
+ for my 1992 proposal.
+
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot79">&hellip; Muguet<a
+ href="#tex2html80"><sup>40</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>Head of the Knowledge Networks and Information
+ Society lab at the University of Geneva.
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot136">&hellip; payments.<a
+ href="#tex2html81"><sup>41</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>See
+ <a
+ href="http://stallman.org/mecenat/global-patronage.html">http://stallman.org/mecenat/global-patronage.html</a>.
+
+</dd>
+<dt id="foot137">&hellip; MP3<a
+ href="#tex2html82"><sup>42</sup></a></dt>
+<dd>As of 2017 the patents on playing MP3 files have
+reportedly expired.
+</dd>
+</dl>
+
+</div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
+<div id="footer">
+<div class="unprintable">
+
+<p>Please send general FSF &amp; GNU inquiries to
+<a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org">&lt;gnu@gnu.org&gt;</a>.
+There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a>
+the FSF. Broken links and other corrections or suggestions can be sent
+to <a href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org">&lt;webmasters@gnu.org&gt;</a>.</p>
+
+<p><!-- TRANSLATORS: Ignore the original text in this paragraph,
+ replace it with the translation of these two:
+
+ We work hard and do our best to provide accurate, good quality
+ translations. However, we are not exempt from imperfection.
+ Please send your comments and general suggestions in this regard
+ to <a href="mailto:web-translators@gnu.org">
+ &lt;web-translators@gnu.org&gt;</a>.</p>
+
+ <p>For information on coordinating and submitting translations of
+ our web pages, see <a
+ href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+ README</a>. -->
+Please see the <a
+href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting translations
+of this article.</p>
+</div>
+
+<!-- Regarding copyright, in general, standalone pages (as opposed to
+ files generated as part of manuals) on the GNU web server should
+ be under CC BY-ND 4.0. Please do NOT change or remove this
+ without talking with the webmasters or licensing team first.
+ Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the
+ document. For web pages, it is ok to list just the latest year the
+ document was modified, or published.
+
+ If you wish to list earlier years, that is ok too.
+ Either "2001, 2002, 2003" or "2001-2003" are ok for specifying
+ years, as long as each year in the range is in fact a copyrightable
+ year, i.e., a year in which the document was published (including
+ being publicly visible on the web or in a revision control system).
+
+ There is more detail about copyright years in the GNU Maintainers
+ Information document, www.gnu.org/prep/maintain. -->
+
+<p>Copyright &copy; 2009, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 Richard M. Stallman</p>
+
+<p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license"
+href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">Creative
+Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.</p>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
+
+<p class="unprintable">Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2020/10/06 08:25:53 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+</div><!-- for class="inner", starts in the banner include -->
+</body>
+</html>