[linux-audio-user] Re: Free Software vs. Open Source: Where do *you* stand?

[Cesare Marilungo]

Rob wrote:

>On Tue February 21 2006 15:08, Peter Bessman wrote:
>  
>
>>The fact that it's illegal to sell your vote does not prove
>>that contracts can be morally wrong.
>>    
>>
>
>Not that the 'shrink-wrap licenses' to which Fons was referring 
>are even accepted as contracts in many venues.  I certainly 
>never had a contract with, say, Syntrillian in the bad old days 
>when I would download a pirated copy of Cool Edit Pro; the text 
>of whatever EULA they used was never even included with the 
>illicit version.  The GPL itself is also not a contract; it's a 
>license without which you can't distribute the program except by 
>violating copyright.
>
>The respect argument is specious as well; I certainly don't 
>respect Wal-Mart when I'm buying a new toothbrush or whatever.  
>(And since I've paid for it, I'm perfectly within my rights to 
>share that toothbrush with anyone, though I'd probably rather 
>not.)
>
>So we're back to copyright violation, not breach of contract.  
>And I stand by my original statement.  I kinda like copyright 
>now that there's enough software covered under the GPL to make 
>it inconvenient for the people who fought so hard to extend 
>copyright to cover computer software in the first place. 
>
>Nonetheless, those who have attempted to use copyright to turn 
>imaginary property (based on infinite reproducibility) into real 
>property (based on scarcity) are wrong, no matter how much it 
>might benefit them to do so.  One million copies of notepad.exe 
>have the exact same value in the real world as a single copy, 
>regardless of how much sweat some peon in Redmond shed during 
>its initial development.  And that goes for emacs, Finder, Doom 
>3, Donkey Kong, In A Silent Way, Oliver Twist, Citizen Kane and 
>the Mona Lisa too.
>
>I don't want to hear the "but no one can make any money unless we 
>treat copies like physical objects" line anymore either.  If I 
>went into business selling a new kind of wrenches, with a 
>shrink-wrap agreement on the outside requiring that they were 
>only to be used by the purchaser, and then went broke because 
>people started sharing their wrenches left and right despite my 
>legal threats, I would deserve to be broke for pursuing such an 
>unrealistic business plan.  See also: CueCat.  
>
>Rob
>
>  
>
Amen.

c.
-- 
www.cesaremarilungo.com