We stand for a Free and Open Milk and Cookies for everyone without artificial limitations imposed by the creators of Milk and Cookies!
We support transparent and participatory processes for making Free Milk and Cookies policy and the establishment of five basic principles:
* Expression: Don’t censor Free Milk and Cookies for Everyone!
* Access: Promote universal access to fast and affordable networks of Free Milk and Cookies!
* Openness: Keep open networks where everyone is free to have Free Milk and Cookies!
* Innovation: Protect the freedom to have Free Milk and Cookies without permission. Don’t block Free Milk and Cookies, and don’t punish Milk and Cookies for their users’ actions!
* Privacy: Protect Free Milk and Cookies and defend everyone’s privacy to have Free Milk and Cookies!
If you don’t defend your right to Free Milk and Cookies, who will!
Satire and commentary adapted from the absurdity that is:
http://www.internetdeclaration.org/freedom
The Trichordist 
man, Ian North is gonna be pissed.
Cows simply eat the grass that’s already there!!!….Why should we make them rich? What right does a dairy farmer or even a Keebler elf have to make us pay for what is ours by right of…..wait….I lost my train of thought …I just went to my Facebook page…Dude!! That’s not how you ride a donkey!!! What was I saying??
Brilliant!! It is also a rather interesting parallel to the stolen/free downloads issue. If free “milk and cookies” are available to all, who pays for all the free “milk and cookies”? The bakers or the distributors? Who owns the milk and cookies? The bakers or the distributors? It gets deeper, but I think you get the idea.
There is no need to make milk and cookies free. I am prepared to pay $10 a month for unlimited access to the world’s milk and cookies. I am not an evil corporation, I want to know the farmer is getting his 0.00000000000002 cents.
@richard everyone knows that the bakers pay for the free milk and cookies! You are a barrier to innovation if you refuse to let everyone have your milk and cookies for free! If you are a baker, you need to get a new business model, perhaps sell t-shirts or go on tour so you can afford to service everyone who demands your milk and cookies for free! What, you protest, you are an ignorant luddite! Who cares how long it took you to learn to make your tasty cookies! Who cares that flour and sugar cost money! We demand your cookies for free!
So….if I bake cookies at my house anyone can come eat them? Seems unfair.
The Internet Freedom declaration is about free speech not “free beer”. I don’t see what’s so absurd about that. I’ve really enjoyed the eye-opening articles on this website, but if you’re just going to mock anything which has the word “free” in it then you’re going to start sounding like the narrow-minded proponents of piracy who attack anything that might contradict their uninformed views.
You don’t find it outrageous that the tech lobby shamelessly uses our national holiday to promote their views? I think they deserve to be mocked. Besides how is “sharing” MY expression THEIR freedom of speech? Remember your rights end at the point they begin infringing on my rights. That’s how civilization works. If you think there are no limits on personal rights that’s Nihilism. And may I remind you what The Big Lebowski had to say on the matter.
Walter: “Nihilists! Fuck me. I mean, say what you like about the tenets of National Socialism, Dude, at least it’s an ethos.”
I agree with you, I just fail to see where the declaration says all of that is OK.
@1glen1 – The declaration, if it ever became reality, would inevitably prevent anyone ever charging money for their “beer”, so, your argument is fail.
The last two points of the declaration completely cancel each other out. You can’t have privacy without ownership, and you can’t have ownership without punishing infringers.
Please tell me, which part of the declaration prevents you from charging for your work?
Who is gonna pay for work if it’s given away for free? How does an individual artist get rid of the large industrial scale sites that are sharing the music for free. little guy vs $400 million dollar site like megaupload? We need laws and enforcement to do this. The free internet crowd has made it very clear they will not allow it.
The free speech vs. free beer analogy is apt. We’ve been through this before with the FSF and the GPL – it is clear cut there – only use software that has a license that is compatible with the GPL. For the arts, if I publish something using the Creative Commons License, then I am exercising my rights of free speech. I think such things should be applauded. However, if I download a piece of music that is encumbered by commercial license restrictions, I am engaging in free beer.
I can’t help recalling the absurd study by Felix “BYOB” Oberholzer-Gee and Koleman “Set Up” Strumpf that concluded that musicians would–if deprived of cash compensation–work for free beer and “admiration” if you catch my drift. Not to mention Lessig’s “hybrid economy” dodge where the “sharing economy” provides the free culture and the tech industry gets the free beer–like Lessig’s example of Flickr but also the elephant in the room of Google and its YouTube, that would be the Google that gives millions to Creative Commons and controls its board of directors. Yes it’s true, these luminaries would like us to exist on fumes and barter in hopes of getting lucky at a gig.