[LAU] So what do you think sucks about Linux audio ?

[david]

On 02/08/2013 05:22 AM, drew Roberts wrote:
> On Friday 08 February 2013 02:38:45 david wrote:
>> Using something without agreeing to the terms (licence) under which the
>> provider of that something offers it is theft.
>
> Of course it is not theft. It may or may not be illegal, but it is not theft.
> If a group of kids sneak onto a field and play a ball game without the
> owner's permission, even when the terms of use of the field are posted, they
> do not get charged with theft.

Not good examples to choose. If they sneak onto the field and play ball 
and while doing so break the water fountain, it's called vandalism but 
is really (underneath it) stealing the use of the water fountain from 
both the owner of the field AND anyone else who wants to use it afterward.

But software and hard things like baseball diamonds are too different to 
be good analogies.

> Why must everything be theft, piracy, rape, treason, etc. Loaded words. Call
> things what they are.

You're the one who added "piracy, rape, treason". Why? None of them are 
synonymous with copyright.

I consider it theft because it's stealing from the licenser/creator the 
ability to control the use and distribution of their creation. If you 
don't like the terms that the creator makes their creation available to 
people, *go use a creation whose terms you agree with*.

-- 
David
gnome at hawaii.rr.com
authenticity, honesty, community
http://clanjones.org/david/
http://dancing-treefrog.deviantart.com/