[Consortium] fao Paul White: Letter for publication

[Daniel James]

Hello Paul,

In your July issue editorial, I think you've unintentionally 
misrepresented the views of free software developers producing audio 
and music applications for Linux and other platforms. There are 
people who think software should be free, but they're not demanding 
that proprietary software houses give away their creations.

Instead, they are writing their own software, and giving the source 
code away - which of course they are perfectly entitled to do. It has 
practical benefits because software needs active maintenance to 
remain useful, so the more people who have access to the code, the 
better. 

The argument that software and physical property, such as the stuff in 
your house, are equivalent will always fall on its face. At the end 
of the day, software is just a bunch of numbers, and what's true for 
software creators (marginal or zero cost copying) is just as true for 
software users. 

Proprietary software companies moan about so-called 'piracy', but in 
truth they'd rather have an unpaid-for copy of their own software 
running on your machine than a paid-for copy from their competitor. 
It's how a particular application becomes a de-facto standard. Every 
time someone passes a installer CD to their friend, they are 
participating in viral marketing for that company.

Hardware prices have fallen dramatically, but proprietary music 
software is as expensive as ever. I mean, £1450 for a single copy of 
Nuendo, with known bugs? I'd resent having to pay for bug fix updates 
too. Is it any wonder that students and musicians are writing their 
own software?  

Cheers!

Daniel James

63 School Green Road
Freshwater
Isle of Wight
PO40 9AT