Advanced

Free software, you've been framed

Posted by dcparris on · 3 comments
NewsForge; By Bruce Byfield
Mail this story
Print this story

The Free Software Foundation (FSF) has always been concerned about the power of language. Most famously, it is known for insisting on the term "GNU/Linux" and giving "free software" equal billing with "open source" in order to receive its due credit. Now, as the FSF prepares a campaign to inform the general public about the dangers of digital rights management (DRM) technologies, it's struggling with the question of how to enter a debate that the opposition has defined in such a way that opposing views are discredited automatically.

Full Story

  Nav
» Read more about: Story Type: News Story; Groups: GNU, Linux

» Get new stories by e-mail: nightly or as they are published

« Return to the newswire homepage

  Related stories
» More like this

Comments (3)

Stifling debate.

This is a common thing these days. The trick works like this; let's take Immigration as an example. Anyone who says "I am concerned about immigration" is instantly branded a racist. This is semantic misdirection. It creates in the mind of the listener the thought that to be concerned about immigration is indeed racism so best not think those thoughts. It makes any debate impossible because the standard response is to take whatever argument is given and take it to its most absurd extreme and hand it back as "what you really said was not "I am concerned about immigration" but was "I hate all people who don't look like me and I won't tolerate any of them in my country". Thus, anyone who is concerned about DRM is really saying "I support wide spread piracy and theft".

It's narrow minded and betrays the fear at the heart of the "official line". Any one who can't stand to hear opposing opinions must be secretly convinced of the transparency of their own.

We don't have to play by these rules.

With patience and politeness we should point out the flaw in any argument that refuses to consider alternate explanations or possibilities. And in particular we should point out the hysteria and the vested interests that underpin this refusal to debate.

DRM = Deceptively Restricting Me

We need to hammer on the propaganda phrases used by the vested interests who want to keep us caged and paying for every little sensory perception.

DRM digitally manages to remove rights, just because the MAFIAA wants more money. Therefore, DRM really means Deceptively Restricting Me.

The "broadcast flag" sounds sooo innocent, contrary to its treacherous destruction of fair use and invention. Anyone have a suggestion on how to get the message out about that thing?
A long time ago, I noticed that McDonald's counter people would repeat your order to them. You'd say, "I'd like a big mac, a small fries, and a small coke" and they'd "repeat" back to you: "Big mac, regular fries, regular coke". The phrase denoting a particular size changed from "small" to "regular".

Once you notice this sort of changing, a lot of phrasing irritates you. Or at least it irritates me. Advertising irritates me to the point of abandoning television during the Christmas Shopping Season.

The problem with getting irritated by this, or even noticing this phenonmenon, is that NOT EVERYONE NOTICES. Those that either don't notice or choose not to notice can actually violently disagree with you about the whole meaning of the variant phrasing. It's weird.

Post a comment

A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.

Your message:
|||||
10
Markdown: **bold**, *italic*, [text](https://link), - lists, > quotes, $x^2$ for math. Formatting help

Sign up and post (it is free)  or  Log in and post