fixed some more things. slides should be done now.

kiss/freedom/freedomslides.org

@@ -29,28 +29,31 @@
 - What are the four freedoms of free software?
 - What's the difference between Open Source and Free Software? 
 
-* Considerations about Software
+* What is Software?
+** Considerations about Software
 - Source Code is a work of authorship, similar but not identical to
   works of literature, a cooking recipe, or a musical piece.
   - Side Note: Legally, works of authorship fall under Copyright.
 - Some form of Instruction set to make a machine do something.
 - Condensed knowledge, or information (hence IT).
 
-* Considerations about Knowledge
+** Considerations about Knowledge
 - Information has unique, properties, it is not a real commodity and
   it cannot easily be contained.
 - From an economic point of view, knowledge is a positive externality.
   - Software, like all knowledge, should be accessible in a democratic
     and nondiscriminatory way.
-* Intellectual "Property"?
+
+** Intellectual "Property"?
 - Umbrella term for copyright, patent, trademark and other
   categories law. Those have virtually nothing in common.
 - Commonly misused to actually mean anything.
 - Implies claim to ownership, in particular of ideas.
 
-* Market implications
-- In a free market economy monopolies are ususally dangerous and have
-  to be avoided.
+* Free Software Economics
+** Market implications
+- In a free market economy monopolies are usually seen as dangerous
+  and have to be avoided.
   - Monopolies on public goods are really, really bad.
 - Software still generates economic value; however, most is generated
   by use, not sale of software.
@@ -77,14 +80,53 @@
   chance to benefit from your changes. Access to the source code is a
   precondition for this.
 
-* Open Source? 
+* Examples of Licensing
+** F/OSS Licensing 
 Openness of source is less decisive when one or more of the four
 freedoms are formally or effectively taken away.
 The term "Open Source" is usually used synonymous to Free Software, in
 the past the term was coined to avoid misunderstandings. 
-
-* Licensing 
-** GPL
+*** GPL
 - Copyleft, restrictive, enforces all four freedoms.
 *** BSD
 - Non-copyleft, permissive, not all rights have to be conserved.
+
+* Conclusion
+** On Flash
+Flash is not actually secret but adobe keeps making new versions which
+are different, faster than anyone can keep up and make free software
+to play those files, so it has almost the same effect as being secret.
+
+** On non-free formats
+It's bad to distribute recordings in mp3 or any other proprietary
+format. Although there is free software to handle those formats,
+distributors legally can not include support for such formats because
+they are patented in many countries. Modern distributions of GNU/Linux
+facilitate use of these formats by letting the user decide, thereby
+avoiding legal issues. Whether or not this is a good thing is a
+question of moral. On the one hand, many of these formats have become
+pseudo-standards and for most users, the short term usability aspect
+prevails. On the other hand, it's a very bad idea if we were hoping to
+get rid of proprietary formats eventually.
+
+
+** Wrap-Up
+- If you want to support freedom, don't distribute recordings in
+  non-free formats. Please use formats such as .ogg, .webm, or .png.
+
+- In an epoch when governments work for the mega corporations instead
+  of reporting to their citizens, every technological change can be
+  taken advantage of to reduce our freedom.
+
+** Further reading
+- Richard Stallman: The GNU Manifesto
+- Ben Klemens: Math you can't use
+- Eric S. Raymond: The Cathedral and the Bazaar
+- Stephan N. Kinsella: Against Intellectual Property
+*** Websites
+- http://stopsoftwarepatents.com
+- http://defectivebydesign.org
+- http://patentabsurdity.com
+- http://fsf.org
+
+

kiss/freedom/freedomslides.tex

-% Created 2012-04-12 Thu 16:37
+% Created 2012-04-13 Fri 15:20
 \documentclass[bigger]{beamer}
 \usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
 \usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
@@ -51,8 +51,11 @@
 \item What's the difference between Open Source and Free Software?
 \end{itemize}
 \end{frame}
-\section{Considerations about Software}
+\section{What is Software?}
 \label{sec-2}
+\begin{frame}
+\frametitle{Considerations about Software}
+\label{sec-2-1}
 
 \begin{itemize}
 \item Source Code is a work of authorship, similar but not identical to
@@ -63,8 +66,10 @@
 \item Some form of Instruction set to make a machine do something.
 \item Condensed knowledge, or information (hence IT).
 \end{itemize}
-\section{Considerations about Knowledge}
-\label{sec-3}
+\end{frame}
+\begin{frame}
+\frametitle{Considerations about Knowledge}
+\label{sec-2-2}
 
 \begin{itemize}
 \item Information has unique, properties, it is not a real commodity and
@@ -75,8 +80,10 @@
     and nondiscriminatory way.
 \end{itemize}
 \end{itemize}
-\section{Intellectual ``Property''?}
-\label{sec-4}
+\end{frame}
+\begin{frame}
+\frametitle{Intellectual ``Property''?}
+\label{sec-2-3}
 
 \begin{itemize}
 \item Umbrella term for copyright, patent, trademark and other
@@ -84,12 +91,16 @@
 \item Commonly misused to actually mean anything.
 \item Implies claim to ownership, in particular of ideas.
 \end{itemize}
-\section{Market implications}
-\label{sec-5}
+\end{frame}
+\section{Free Software Economics}
+\label{sec-3}
+\begin{frame}
+\frametitle{Market implications}
+\label{sec-3-1}
 
 \begin{itemize}
-\item In a free market economy monopolies are ususally dangerous and have
-  to be avoided.
+\item In a free market economy monopolies are usually seen as dangerous
+  and have to be avoided.
 \begin{itemize}
 \item Monopolies on public goods are really, really bad.
 \end{itemize}
@@ -98,11 +109,12 @@
 \item Software patents are in effect monopolies on ideas.
 \end{itemize}
   
+\end{frame}
 \section{The Four Freedoms}
-\label{sec-6}
+\label{sec-4}
 \begin{frame}
 \frametitle{Freedom 0}
-\label{sec-6-1}
+\label{sec-4-1}
 
 \begin{itemize}
 \item You are free to run the program, for any purpose.
@@ -113,7 +125,7 @@
 \end{frame}
 \begin{frame}
 \frametitle{Freedom 1}
-\label{sec-6-2}
+\label{sec-4-2}
 
 \begin{itemize}
 \item You are free to study how the program works, and change it so it
@@ -126,7 +138,7 @@
 \end{frame}
 \begin{frame}
 \frametitle{Freedom 2}
-\label{sec-6-3}
+\label{sec-4-3}
 
 \begin{itemize}
 \item You are free to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor.
@@ -140,7 +152,7 @@
 \end{frame}
 \begin{frame}
 \frametitle{Freedom 3}
-\label{sec-6-4}
+\label{sec-4-4}
 
 \begin{itemize}
 \item You are free to distribute copies of your modified versions to
@@ -149,40 +161,91 @@
   precondition for this.
 \end{itemize}
 \end{frame}
-\section{Open Source?}
-\label{sec-7}
+\section{Examples of Licensing}
+\label{sec-5}
+\begin{frame}
+\frametitle{F/OSS Licensing}
+\label{sec-5-1}
 
 Openness of source is less decisive when one or more of the four
 freedoms are formally or effectively taken away.
 The term ``Open Source'' is usually used synonymous to Free Software, in
 the past the term was coined to avoid misunderstandings. 
-\section{Licensing}
-\label{sec-8}
-\begin{frame}
-\frametitle{GPL}
-\label{sec-8-1}
+\begin{itemize}
 
+\item GPL
+\label{sec-5-1-1}%
 \begin{itemize}
 \item Copyleft, restrictive, enforces all four freedoms.
 \end{itemize}
-\begin{itemize}
 
 \item BSD
-\label{sec-8-1-1}%
+\label{sec-5-1-2}%
 \begin{itemize}
 \item Non-copyleft, permissive, not all rights have to be conserved.
 \end{itemize}
 
+\end{itemize} % ends low level
+\end{frame}
+\section{Conclusion}
+\label{sec-6}
+\begin{frame}
+\frametitle{On Flash}
+\label{sec-6-1}
+
+Flash is not actually secret but adobe keeps making new versions which
+are different, faster than anyone can keep up and make free software
+to play those files, so it has almost the same effect as being secret.
+\end{frame}
+\begin{frame}
+\frametitle{On non-free formats}
+\label{sec-6-2}
+
+It's bad to distribute recordings in mp3 or any other proprietary
+format. Although there is free software to handle those formats,
+distributors legally can not include support for such formats because
+they are patented in many countries. Modern distributions of GNU/Linux
+facilitate use of these formats by letting the user decide, thereby
+avoiding legal issues. Whether or not this is a good thing is a
+question of moral. On the one hand, many of these formats have become
+pseudo-standards and for most users, the short term usability aspect
+prevails. On the other hand, it's a very bad idea if we were hoping to
+get rid of proprietary formats eventually.
+\end{frame}
+\begin{frame}
+\frametitle{Wrap-Up}
+\label{sec-6-3}
 
 \begin{itemize}
-\item Perversion Software Patente: Wie etwas, das eigentlich Innovation foerdern soll genau das Gegenteil bewirkt.
-\item Digital Restrictions Management (DRM):
+\item If you want to support freedom, don't distribute recordings in
+  non-free formats. Please use formats such as .ogg, .webm, or .png.
+\item In an epoch when governments work for the mega corporations instead
+  of reporting to their citizens, every technological change can be
+  taken advantage of to reduce our freedom.
+\end{itemize}
+\end{frame}
+\begin{frame}
+\frametitle{Further reading}
+\label{sec-6-4}
+
 \begin{itemize}
-\item Defective by Design und Malicious Features. Beispiele: Amazon Kindle, ei-Phone, Skype, Spotify, Steam, Diverse unfreie Betriebssysteme
-\item Probleme mit restriktiven Datenformaten: MP3, flash, docx, etc\ldots{}
+\item Richard Stallman: The GNU Manifesto
+\item Ben Klemens: Math you can't use
+\item Eric S. Raymond: The Cathedral and the Bazaar
+\item Stephan N. Kinsella: Against Intellectual Property
 \end{itemize}
+\begin{itemize}
+
+\item Websites
+\label{sec-6-4-1}%
+\begin{itemize}
+\item \href{http://stopsoftwarepatents.com}{http://stopsoftwarepatents.com}
+\item \href{http://defectivebydesign.org}{http://defectivebydesign.org}
+\item \href{http://patentabsurdity.com}{http://patentabsurdity.com}
+\item \href{http://fsf.org}{http://fsf.org}
 \end{itemize}
 
+
 \end{itemize} % ends low level
 \end{frame}