Interoperability for games is fundamentally flawed reasoning
Posted Aug 24, 2005 20:06 UTC (Wed) by FlorianMueller
In reply to: Interoperability for games is fundamentally flawed reasoning
Parent article: On the defense of piracy enablers
QUOTE: It's the other way around: any and all rights granted to authors must "promote the progress of science and the useful arts".
I'm slowly but surely getting tired of responding to ever more comments that take a one-sided perspective on things. In every one of my comments, I've talked about why one set of considerations would or would not outweigh another, and I keep getting comments that turn a blind eye to one side of the equation.
Today's world - and I'm speaking of free economies, not communist states - undoubtedly views intellectual property rights as a necessity to provide an economic incentive for investment. That's not in contradiction to the idea of promoting the progress of science and the useful arts. However, it's not like an author's right needs more justification than a restriction of an author's right needs. There has to be a balance, and that balance is genre-specific.
If you can make a case that you save human lives by reverse engineering some software that is used in a hospital, and that it's the only reasonable way of saving those lives, then you'll certainly find the judges to be more sympathetic to your case than if you say you want to interfere with someone else's computer game.
to post comments)