| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
No future in proprietary software (ZDNet)No future in proprietary software (ZDNet)Posted Dec 5, 2002 15:01 UTC (Thu) by herbalite (guest, #8390)Parent article: No future in proprietary software (ZDNet)
While it reamins to be seen which path leads to success in future, there is one thing
(Log in to post comments)
No future in proprietary software (ZDNet) Posted Dec 5, 2002 15:36 UTC (Thu) by qazwsx (guest, #8392) [Link] The right "to be proprietaty" is a freedom of removing my freedoms of sharing, using and adapting the software. Your argument is pointless.
No future in proprietary software (ZDNet) Posted Dec 5, 2002 15:55 UTC (Thu) by herbalite (guest, #8390) [Link] True freedom has to respect others that hold different values, that's my entire point.
No future in proprietary software (ZDNet) Posted Dec 5, 2002 17:38 UTC (Thu) by qazwsx (guest, #8392) [Link] So, if by my personal values I decide that you should pay me a big fine, should I have the freedom to make it happen? Like you said, true freedom means that you have to respect my values, right?
No future in proprietary software (ZDNet) Posted Dec 5, 2002 16:28 UTC (Thu) by proski (subscriber, #104) [Link] It's sad to see this argument on LWN. I think it was answered many times. The problem is not that the companies want to make money off the software. The problem is that they enjoy protection from the state, and that protection is called copyright. Copyright is not a natural right - it was created to boost productivity and innovation. If it doesn't work for software, then the rules should be changed.I'm not advocating opening source code for everything. If I wrote the program, it's my right to hide or even delete the source. However, those who want to get benefits from the state for being innovative should not be allowed to hide their innovations from the public.
Short, sweet, to the point... are you OK? Posted Dec 5, 2002 18:06 UTC (Thu) by Medievalist (guest, #8395) [Link] Damn, what a concise, cogent remark. I bet you never post on Slashdot.
No future in proprietary software (ZDNet) Posted Dec 5, 2002 19:37 UTC (Thu) by josh_stern (guest, #4868) [Link] What exactly is a "natural right"? Is it a natural right to restrictothers from entering your house? (what makes the house yours? did you construct it?) Is it a natural right to restrict them from wandering over your property? What about if you live on a long pleasant stretch of sea shore? Sometimes people argue that digital copyright is much less natural because the uniqueness of a copy is not limited by physics/cost, but the argument could be exactly reversed: the author of the copyrighted work added something new to the universe from nothing, so one could say that she has more natural right to restrict how it is used than someone who simply paid for a property title to something created by nature that would exist and be used by someone whether or not the author ever existed.
|
|
||||||||||||