On Sun, 2008-01-20 at 11:41 +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
If you truly want the policy to be robust, it's important to avoid the fallacy that programs can be discretely separated from other interpretations of digital information.
That's not a fallacy, it's a difference of opinion.
It's perfectly possible to talk about digital works in terms of what their function is, what freedoms you might need for those functions, and whether or not a work is free for a certain function.
Without the function it's pretty meaningless. You can't point at a random binary, without knowing its function but knowing its license, and call it either "free" or "not free".
Cheers,
Alex.