| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Microsoft contract forces cancellation of Stallman talk in Argentina (Matware)Microsoft contract forces cancellation of Stallman talk in Argentina (Matware)Posted Sep 2, 2009 21:09 UTC (Wed) by alvieboy (subscriber, #51617)Parent article: Microsoft contract forces cancellation of Stallman talk in Argentina (Matware)
They would not dare to do that in Venezuela. (pun intended)
Now seriously,
I am not familiar with Argentina laws, but I believe in any democratic country law would forbid these kind of agreements. It goes against one of the most important liberties: freedom of speech.
I personally do not like Stallman a lot (we diverge in some fulcral points), but I'm with him on this one.
Álvaro
(Log in to post comments)
Microsoft contract forces cancellation of Stallman talk in Argentina (Matware) Posted Sep 2, 2009 21:37 UTC (Wed) by nybble41 (subscriber, #55106) [Link] Freedom of speech means that the law cannot prohibit you from speaking (per se), or punish you for it, regardless of the content of your speech. You remain free to voluntarily accept limitations on your own speech, however, as the university has done here. They are free to break that contract, but then they must forfeit the penalty they agreed to in accepting it. This would be perfectly legal in the U.S. as well as most other democratic nations—and more to the point, in all nations which prioritize liberty, which is independent of, and often opposed to, democracy.
Microsoft contract forces cancellation of Stallman talk in Argentina (Matware) Posted Sep 2, 2009 22:11 UTC (Wed) by alvieboy (subscriber, #51617) [Link]
Despite the fact that it is not actually Uni's speech.
I am not sure what's the concrete status of Universities in Argentina, but I do believe they are not private held. This enforces them to serve the population. Point one.
Freedom of speech - I am free to speak up for whatever I want albeit I might suffer consequences from it. But that comes after. No one can forbid me to expose my points of view - That's censure - the same censure US allegedly are against as a Democratic country.
I do understand your point, but I must disagree. Here where I live *no one*, not even the government, can forbid be from expressing my points of view, even if them put my own country in a "dangerous" situation. Nor can any privately held company. They can sue me after for damages, but surely not any other way. And I can go to jail too, but I have to be given the freedom to speech.
So basically this boils down to: It's up to Uni to decide whether it wants someone to speak there or not, but telling us that this breaks up some kind of [illegal?] agreement is throwing dust to people's eyes.
It boils down to politics.
Álvaro
Microsoft contract forces cancellation of Stallman talk in Argentina (Matware) Posted Sep 3, 2009 5:54 UTC (Thu) by daniels (subscriber, #16193) [Link]
As someone has said, it doesn't mean that there can never be any limitations placed on where/etc.
For instance: you can't show up to your office and sit there with a megaphone loudly criticising your boss through a megaphone. That would pretty rapidly lead to termination of employment.
Likewise, the university presumably has an agreement with Microsoft prohibiting this kind of thing, with penalties (or loss of benefits) for non-compliance.
Freedom of speech means that the government can't place a blanket prohibition on saying certain things. It doesn't mean you're free to walk in anywhere at any time and say whatever you like, despite what Internet commenters everywhere seem to think.
Ideals of Universities Posted Sep 3, 2009 8:37 UTC (Thu) by eru (subscriber, #2753) [Link] Universities are a special case! Traditionally they are supposed to encourage critical thinking and free exchange of ideas. Of course within civilized limits (no bullhorns in offices). A critical guest lecture is certainly something a good university should not ban.Based on what one sees here (possibly not the whole story, and I cannot read Spanish), the university in question seems to have failed in its mission. When freedom of speech comes up, many are quick to point out it applies to governements and laws, but in a world where large corporations wield influence comparable to governements, it is a too narrow view.
Microsoft contract forces cancellation of Stallman talk in Argentina (Matware) Posted Sep 2, 2009 21:44 UTC (Wed) by Skedyagpic (guest, #60375) [Link]
'Freedom of speech' does not mean you can say anything at any time anywhere.
At least in America, it only protects you from the government, not from private institutions. And even then, the government can damn well abbridge your free speech rights for public safety (yelling fire in a theatre) obstruction of justice (telling everyone in a bar where the DUI checkpoints are) or national security (telling terrorists the identities of counter-terrorists) just to name a few examples.
That said. Microsoft is a douchebag. The university should nullify that contract. And who said Stallman was going to criticize Microsoft there? I doubt "criticize microsoft" was on the agenda.
Microsoft contract forces cancellation of Stallman talk in Argentina (Matware) Posted Sep 2, 2009 22:29 UTC (Wed) by alvieboy (subscriber, #51617) [Link]
> 'Freedom of speech' does not mean you can say anything at any time anywhere.
It does. I might suffer the consequences.
> At least in America, it only protects you from the government, not from private institutions.
How does it protect from the government ?
> And even then, the government can damn well abbridge your free speech rights for public safety (yelling fire in a theatre) obstruction of justice (telling everyone in a bar where the DUI checkpoints are) or national security (telling terrorists the identities of counter-terrorists) just to name a few examples.
Those are law violations (except maybe for the latter). There is no law depicting you cannot speak about Microsoft, is there ?
> That said. Microsoft is a douchebag. The university should nullify that contract. And who said Stallman was going to criticize Microsoft there? I doubt "criticize microsoft" was on the agenda.
Agreed, but.. I sincerely doubt there was such an agreement. At least formal.
God how I hate politic games.
Álvaro
Microsoft contract forces cancellation of Stallman talk in Argentina (Matware) Posted Sep 3, 2009 20:34 UTC (Thu) by NAR (subscriber, #1313) [Link] There is no law depicting you cannot speak about Microsoft, is there ?
Probably there's no explicit law that if you take the bus, but don't buy a ticket, you have to pay a penalty fee. Still, you have to pay, because by boarding the bus, you've made a contract with the bus operator that includes the fee. Similarly, it's possible that Microsoft makes a contract with a university that there will be no anti-MS talks at the university (even though probably this didn't happen, just sensationalist
explicit law Posted Sep 4, 2009 14:29 UTC (Fri) by tialaramex (subscriber, #21167) [Link]
Interestingly it took an explicit law in the UK to make it possible to fine people for travelling on the train without a ticket.
This "penalty fare" law requires an application to government for each station to be covered, and extensive signage and reminder messages at every entrance, the provision of working ticket machines or 24 hour ticket staff with a monitoring system to ensure the law isn't applied if the machines break or the staff fall ill, and so on.
Previously (and still today where the train operator hasn't put all this in place and made a formal application to use the law) the only thing the inspectors could do was demand that someone travelling without a ticket bought one there and then. If the person refused, their only recourse was to try to take them to court (in most cases the individual would refuse to identify themselves and flee the scene) and even if it got to court the case was likely to fail if the defendant offered to pay the ticket price and said they'd forgotten to buy a ticket or had some other even halfway plausible excuse.
So essentially until this law was put on the books, the train operators had to rely on their passengers being either honest (and buying a ticket voluntarily) or stupid. Fortunately a lot of people are honest.
Microsoft contract forces cancellation of Stallman talk in Argentina (Matware) Posted Sep 2, 2009 23:31 UTC (Wed) by PaulWay (✭ supporter ✭, #45600) [Link]
> And who said Stallman was going to criticize Microsoft there? I doubt "criticize microsoft" was on the agenda.
To paraphrase Linus: "It is not my intention to criticise Microsoft. That would be a completely unintended side-effect."
Have fun,
Paul
Microsoft contract forces cancellation of Stallman talk in Argentina (Matware) Posted Sep 3, 2009 2:23 UTC (Thu) by mgh (guest, #5696) [Link]
Many software license agreements prohibit free speech - and they are sold in many countries that have "free speech" laws.
Microsoft contract forces cancellation of Stallman talk in Argentina (Matware) Posted Sep 3, 2009 7:32 UTC (Thu) by michaeljt (subscriber, #39183) [Link]
But they are not always legally enforceable. Perhaps it is time that people start taking these things to consumer protection/trading standards organisations for deliberately misleading purchasers about their rights...
|
|
||||||||||||