Re: [ox-en] Impaired - is it SCO? preliminary thoughts.
- From: Martin Hardie <auskadi tvcabo.co.mz>
- Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2003 15:01:52 +0200
On Monday 27 October 2003 13:28, Felix Stalder wrote:
In what sense in this case different?
Maybe in one way how it is differnt to the 92-93 situation is summarised by
borrowing this quote:
"The ability to modify technology in the 21st century is power," Moglen says.
"And it either belongs to a few, or to everybody. ... Those who control the
behavior of technology control lives."-- Eben Moglen, 2003-10-19
The politics of this dispute are much sharper and much more crucial to capital
than the tiff between USL and Berkerely. This is another reason why I feel
the optimism of those who say SCO hasn't got a case need to be tempered a
little.
In the end it is not about little old SCO (although I think this will play a
role intheir struggle for "freedom" against the Goliath IBM) but whether the
current sitaution of corporate sovereignty that exists on the globe will let
itself be undermined by people imposing GPL "restrictions".
As I think I mentioned maybe what is more important in this case is the
rhetoric and not the law as we knew it in the past. We have seen law been
thrown out the window internationally for the sake of capital's growth and
rule. If technologyand property rights are so important why cannot we see a
"modernisation" of IP law?
Martin
--
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
"Mind you, I am not asking you to bear witness to what you believe false,
which would be a sin, but to testify falsely to what you believe true - which
is a virtuous act because it compensates for lack of proof of something that
certainly exists or happened."
Bishop Otto to Baudolino
_______________________
http://www.oekonux.org/