Re:Miguel de Icaza responds to latest RMS article
by moron4hire on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @01:38PM
(#864700)
What does the movie theater do to you when you enter BUT suppress your rights to sing/talk/shout/etc, on the terms that they will let you watch the movie? What does the military do to you BUT suppress your right to freely determine your life, on the terms that they will provide food, shelter, and training to you?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Miguel de Icaza responds to latest RMS article
by joe_the_user on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @02:02PM
(#864775)
Ah, but that's within a pretty limited domain.
If the movie theater also restricted your right to write a negative review afterwards, say, it would be a bit dicey.
Some contracts that suppress rights might be defensible BUT the point is that such contract are not apriori valid.
Indeed, your the military example shows the need for limits; there's a reason that only the state can operate with the contract you describe. If a private organization could do such a thing, there would serious trouble on many fronts (private armies = bad things).
Re:Miguel de Icaza responds to latest RMS article
by moron4hire on Tuesday October 06, 2009 @02:09PM
(#864790)
If a movie theater would want to restrict your rights to write a negative review, why would you attend that movie theater? If a contract is bad, you don't enter into it