diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/moglen-harvard-speech-2004.html')
| -rw-r--r-- | talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/moglen-harvard-speech-2004.html | 152 |
1 files changed, 75 insertions, 77 deletions
diff --git a/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/moglen-harvard-speech-2004.html b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/moglen-harvard-speech-2004.html index 6171025..17c02b5 100644 --- a/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/moglen-harvard-speech-2004.html +++ b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/moglen-harvard-speech-2004.html @@ -1,19 +1,25 @@ <!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" --> -<!-- Parent-Version: 1.77 --> +<!-- Parent-Version: 1.96 --> +<!-- This page is derived from /server/standards/boilerplate.html --> +<!--#set var="TAGS" value="speeches" --> +<!--#set var="DISABLE_TOP_ADDENDUM" value="yes" --> <title>Eben Moglen Harvard Speech - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation</title> +<style type="text/css" media="print,screen"><!-- +#content i { color: #505050; } +--></style> <!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/moglen-harvard-speech-2004.translist" --> <!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" --> -<h2>Eben Moglen - Speech for Harvard Journal of Law & Technology</h2> +<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/ph-breadcrumb.html" --> +<!--GNUN: OUT-OF-DATE NOTICE--> +<!--#include virtual="/server/top-addendum.html" --> +<div class="article reduced-width"> +<h2>Speech for Harvard Journal of Law & Technology</h2> -<blockquote> -<p>February 23, 2004 - Cambridge, MA, USA</p> -</blockquote> +<address class="byline">by Eben Moglen <a +href="#moglen"><sup>[*]</sup></a></address> -<p> -<i>Eben Moglen is a Professor of Law & Legal History at Columbia -Law School, and General Counsel for the Free Software Foundation</i> -</p> +<p><i>February 23, 2004 - Cambridge, MA, USA</i></p> <p> Thank you. It's a great pleasure to be here. I want to thank the @@ -107,10 +113,10 @@ The copyrights clause is an particular legal embrace of the idea of perfectability through access to and the sharing of knowledge. We, however, the 21st century inheritors of that promise, live in a world in which there is some doubt as to whether property principles, -strongly enforced, with their inevitable corollary of exclusion -— this is mine, you cannot have it unless you pay me — +strongly enforced, with their inevitable corollary of +exclusion—this is mine, you cannot have it unless you pay whether property principles best further that shared goal of the -perfectability of human life and society based around access to +me—perfectability of human life and society based around access to knowledge. </p> @@ -178,7 +184,7 @@ greatest technical reference library on Planet Earth, as of now. The reason I say that is that free software is the only corpus of information fixed in a tangible form, through which anyone, anywhere, can go from naivete to the state of the art in a great technical -subject — what computers can be made to do — solely by +subject—what computers can be made to do—solely by consulting material that is freely available for adaptation and reuse, in any way that she or he may want. </p> @@ -199,13 +205,13 @@ contributes to the perfectability of human beings. <p> That's what we were trying to do, and we have done it. We are, as it happens, driving out of business a firm called the Santa Cruz -Operation [sic] - or SCO Ltd. That was not our intention. That's a +Operation <i>[sic]</i>—or SCO Ltd. That was not our intention. That's a result of something called the creative destruction potential of capitalism, once upon a time identified by Joseph Schumpeter. We are doing a thing better at lower cost than it is presently being done by -those people using other people's money to do it. The result - -celebrated everywhere that capitalism is actually believed in — -is that existing firms are going to have to change their way of +those people using other people's money to do it. The result—celebrated +everywhere that capitalism is actually believed in—is +that existing firms are going to have to change their way of operation or leave the market. This is usually regarded as a positive outcome, associated with enormous welfare increases of which capitalism celebrates at every opportunity everywhere all the time in @@ -251,21 +257,21 @@ surplus, by making the best possible use of the public utility. <p> I think it would be appropriate to suggest, if you like, that where we now are is in a world, where, if I may employ a metaphor, Mr. McBride -and his colleagues — I do mean those in Redmond, as well as -those in Utah — think that roads should all be toll roads. The +and his colleagues—I do mean those in Redmond, as well as +those in Utah—think that roads should all be toll roads. The ability to get from here to there's a product. Buy it, or we exclude you from it. Others believe that highways should be public utilities. Let us figure out how to use the public highways best, so -that everybody can profit from them - from the reduction of the costs -of transportations of goods and the provisions of services — and +that everybody can profit from them—from the reduction of the costs +of transportations of goods and the provisions of services—and by the by, there will be plenty of money to pay traffic engineers and the people who fix the pot holes. </p> <p> We believe, for what little our view of the economics of the software -market may be worth in the 21st century — after all we are the -people who transformed it — we believe that the public utility +market may be worth in the 21st century—after all we are the +people who transformed it—we believe that the public utility service conception of software better reflects economic actuality in the 21st century. We are not surprised that Mr. McBride is going out of business on the other business model. @@ -288,7 +294,7 @@ Mr. McBride may be right about that or he may be wrong. We do not know what the contents of those contracts are in general terms, and we do not even know, as Mr. McBride pointed out to you when he was here, that he is the beneficiary of those contracts. He is presently in litigation trying -to prove that he has what he claims to have — certain contract rights +to prove that he has what he claims to have—certain contract rights which he claims were conveyed to him by Novell. I have no opinion about whose rights those are, and I wish Mr. McBride luck in his litigation over that question. @@ -365,7 +371,7 @@ engage in a little court watching with you. Mr. McBride, when he was here, had much to say about a case called Eldred against Ashcroft, in which Mr. McBride discovers that the United States Supreme Court came out 7-2 against free software and in -favor of capitalism [laughter from audience]. The odd thing is that +favor of capitalism <i>[laughter from audience]</i>. The odd thing is that on the very day when Mr. McBride was standing here discussing that subject with you, I was in Los Angeles discussing the very same thing with a fellow called Kevin McBride, Mr. McBride's brother and the @@ -379,8 +385,8 @@ Court. But it is not quite enough help. </p> <p> -The primary trick in discussing cases - I shrink from saying that even -in this room where I have taught first-year law students — the +The primary trick in discussing cases—I shrink from saying that even +in this room where I have taught first-year law students—the primary trick in discussing cases is to separate holding from dicta, a job with which many lugubrious Septembers and Octobers have been occupied by lawyers all over the planet and by every single one of you @@ -388,8 +394,8 @@ here. </p> <p> -The McBrides, jointly — I feel sometimes as though I'm in a -Quentin Tarantino movie of some sort with them [laughter] — the +The McBrides, jointly—I feel sometimes as though I'm in a +Quentin Tarantino movie of some sort with them <i>[laughter]</i>—the McBrides have failed to distinguish adequately between dicta and holding. </p> @@ -454,8 +460,8 @@ But notice that in order to survive moment one in a lawsuit over free software, it is the defendant who must wave the GPL. It is his permission, his master key to a lawsuit that lasts longer than a nanosecond. This, quite simply, is the reason that lies behind the -statement you have heard — Mr. McBride made it here some weeks -ago — that there has never been a court test of the GPL. +statement you have heard—Mr. McBride made it here some weeks +ago—that there has never been a court test of the GPL. </p> <p> @@ -506,9 +512,9 @@ I'm sure, in the question period. <p> At any rate, they didn't say that. What they said back is, “But Judge, the GNU GPL is a violation of the United States Constitution, -the Copyright Law, the Export Control Law”, and I have now +the Copyright Law, the Export Control Law,” and I have now forgotten whether or not they also said the United Nations Charter of -the Rights of Man. [laughter] +the Rights of Man. <i>[laughter]</i> </p> <p> @@ -683,8 +689,8 @@ a body of software accessible to everybody on earth so robust and so profound in its possibilities that we are a few man months away from doing whatever it is that anybody wants to do with computers all the time. And of course new things are constantly coming up that people -would like to do and they are doing them. In this respect — I -say this with enormous satisfaction — in this respect the Free +would like to do and they are doing them. In this respect—I +say this with enormous satisfaction—in this respect the Free Software Movement has taken hold and is now ineradicably part of the 21st century. But there are challenges to the freedom of free software which we need to deal with. @@ -752,8 +758,8 @@ fuss. I have a side over there too. But the important thing for us in the conversation we're presently having is that the owners of culture now recognize that if they are going to prop up their own methods of distribution, a method of distribution in which distribution is bought -and sold and treated as property — and you can't distribute -unless you pay for the right to do so — unless they can prop up +and sold and treated as property—and you can't distribute +unless you pay for the right to do so—unless they can prop up that structure, they are done in their business models. And for them that requires something which I truly believe amounts to the military occupation of the Net. They have to control all the nodes in the Net @@ -843,8 +849,8 @@ campaign. <p> But in the end, it is our ability to unify all of the elements of the -information society — software, hardware, and bandwidth — -in shared hands, that is in our own hands, that determines whether we +information society—software, hardware, and bandwidth—in +shared hands, that is in our own hands, that determines whether we can succeed in carrying out the great 18th century dream, the one that is found in Article 1 Section 8 of the United States Constitution, the one that says that human beings and human society are infinitely @@ -967,11 +973,11 @@ copyright law allows musicians and artists who stupidly signed agreements when they were but small peons, without legal assistance with big companies, thirty-five years later can take it all back, no matter what. They can reset the clock to zero and re- negotiate. I -call this the Rod Stewart Salvation Act. [laughter] And while that +call this the Rod Stewart Salvation Act. <i>[laughter]</i> And while that might be helpful for the artists, much as the music industry hates it, couldn't that also mean that free software coders, who willingly contributed, weren't even blocked by their employers, to contribute to -Free Software Movement, could — down the line — and +Free Software Movement, could—down the line—and thirty-five years isn't that long in the history of Unix, say, “We take it all back?” </p> @@ -1082,10 +1088,10 @@ The European Commission put forward a suggestion for change and harmonization in European patent law which would have made the issuance of patents for inventions practiceable in software very much easier. The European parliament after a lengthy campaign, led in part -by the Free Software Movement in Europe — that's Euro Linux and +by the Free Software Movement in Europe—that's Euro Linux and the Free Software Foundation Europe and a lot of small software houses in Europe benefitting substantially from the new mode of software as a -public utility — a campaign which involved in the end 250,000 +public utility—a campaign which involved in the end 250,000 petition signatories, the European Parliament decided to say no. And two parties, Greens and Social Democrats, in the European Parliament now understand that patent policy in Europe is a partisan issue. That @@ -1152,8 +1158,8 @@ in order to get their work done from day to day. <p> So one of the things that we do, for those who speak English, is we -actually have to reinforce from time to time — that is all the -time — the distinction between free beer and free speech. On the +actually have to reinforce from time to time—that is all the +time—the distinction between free beer and free speech. On the other hand those of us who live in the United States and speak English shouldn't have quite that much trouble because free speech is a way more important part of the American cultural landscape than free beer @@ -1174,7 +1180,7 @@ We stand for free speech. We're the free speech movement of the moment. And that we have to insist upon, all the time, uncompromisingly. My dear friend, Mr. Stallman, has caused a certain amount of resistance in life by going around saying, “It's free -software, it's not open source”. He has a reason. This is the +software, it's not open source.” He has a reason. This is the reason. We need to keep reminding people that what's at stake here is free speech. We need to keep reminding people that what we're doing is trying to keep the freedom of ideas in the 21st century, in a world @@ -1202,8 +1208,8 @@ for what they create, and so I've heard a lot of, I don't think these are any of your arguments, but I've heard, OK, well, that the musicians will go on tour, so they'll make it back that way, you know, whatever time they put in. Or people will keep creating whatever it is -they create — and this applies to more than just, you know, -movies or music — it applies to books, or even +they create—and this applies to more than just, you know, +movies or music—it applies to books, or even non-entertainment-style knowledge-type things, there's gotta be, you hear people will still do the same amount of it because they love to do it or are interested to do it, but I don't think that quite @@ -1277,8 +1283,8 @@ movies. It was celebrity. They created very large artificial people, you know, with navels eight feet high. And then we had these fantasy personal relationships with the artificial big people. And those personal relationships were manipulated to sell us lots and lots of -stuff — music and movies and T-shirts and toys and, you know, -sexual gratification, and heavens knows what else. All of that on the +stuff—music and movies and T-shirts and toys and, you know, +sexual gratification, and heaven knows what else. All of that on the basis of the underlying real economy of culture, which is that we pay for that which we have relations with. We are human beings, social animals. We have been socialized and evolved for life in the band for @@ -1290,7 +1296,7 @@ that we believe in, we actually do support them. You think that this isn't true, because the current skin at the top of social life says that that's not a robust enough mechanism to sustain creation, and that the only mechanism that will sustain creation is -coercive exclusion — you can't have it, if you don't pay. +coercive exclusion—you can't have it, if you don't pay. </p> <p> @@ -1473,8 +1479,8 @@ problems. And the day is coming. <b>Q:</b> Just a general question on market forces and the free software economy. Even in an ideal world, wouldn't you say that, you know, because of the market forces and then we, you know, a group of -players become especially successful, then they actually — even -though it's an ideal world — they actually become powerful +players become especially successful, then they actually—even +though it's an ideal world—they actually become powerful enough and they monopolize under standards again, and we come back to the same system we have today. So, I guess the question is that whether this product-type system economy we have, is that just a @@ -1505,8 +1511,8 @@ Those of us who believe in the GNU GPL as a particularly valuable license to use believe in that because we think that there are other licenses which too weakly protect the commons and which are more amenable to a form of appropriation that might be ultimately -destructive — this is our concern with the freedoms presented, -for example, by the BSD license — we are concerned that though +destructive—this is our concern with the freedoms presented, +for example, by the BSD license—we are concerned that though the freedoms in the short term seem even greater, that the longterm result is more readily the one that you are pointing at, market participants who are free to propriatize the content of the commons @@ -1539,9 +1545,18 @@ can work our tails off to keep that commons in being healthy, strong and well. That's what I'm up to. That's what I hope you'll be up to as well. </p> +<div class="infobox extra" role="complementary"> +<hr /> +<p id="moglen"> +[*] Eben Moglen is a Professor of Law & Legal History at Columbia +Law School, and General Counsel for the Free Software Foundation. +</p> +</div> +</div> + </div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above --> <!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" --> -<div id="footer"> +<div id="footer" role="contentinfo"> <div class="unprintable"> <p>Please send general FSF & GNU inquiries to @@ -1559,33 +1574,16 @@ to <a href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org"><webmasters@gnu.org></a>.</p> to <a href="mailto:web-translators@gnu.org"> <web-translators@gnu.org></a>.</p> - <p>For information on coordinating and submitting translations of + <p>For information on coordinating and contributing 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 +README</a> for information on coordinating and contributing 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 3.0 US. 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 © 2004 Eben Moglen</p> <p>Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is @@ -1596,10 +1594,10 @@ preserved.</p> <p class="unprintable">Updated: <!-- timestamp start --> -$Date: 2014/04/12 12:40:27 $ +$Date: 2021/12/25 21:07:06 $ <!-- timestamp end --> </p> </div> -</div> +</div><!-- for class="inner", starts in the banner include --> </body> </html> |