[Team] Re: Brazilian PLC 89/03

[Alexandre Oliva]

On Jul  7, 2008, jeff <moe at blagblagblag.org> wrote:

>>> A second problem: that sentence seems to _define_ the term
>>> "authoriterrorism" to refer to this one specific issue.
>> 
>> It does define authoriterrorism, indeed, as the combination of 4
>> behaviors we observe from authoriterrorists, and that we expect the
>> law will be exploited for these purposes.  Do you think it would be
>> better to defined authoriterrorism in a broader way?

> Is this neologism really needed?

Certainly not, but I kind of like it.  It sort of combines the ideas
of pushing "authorit"arian laws and "terror"izing the population, on
behalf of "author"s.

> except for 1 hit besides your usage.

I hadn't realized it wasn't entirely original.  It was really meant to
coin a new term.

> Perhaps you could use another word, such as "government"  ?

?!?

I don't think this would be compatible with the meaning given in the
definition.

It's not a reference to government at all, it's a reference to the
publishers that want to extend copyrights forever and use DRM to
enslave people.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva         http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Free Software Evangelist  oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
FSFLA Board Member       ¡Sé Libre! => http://www.fsfla.org/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer   aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}