| |||||||||||||
were it not for the fact that CopyBot was free software.were it not for the fact that CopyBot was free software.Posted Dec 15, 2006 23:48 UTC (Fri) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091)In reply to: were it not for the fact that CopyBot was free software. by ballombe Parent article: Second Life and Open Source
You will agree that being a text edit followed by a
(Log in to post comments)
were it not for the fact that CopyBot was free software. Posted Dec 16, 2006 14:26 UTC (Sat) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link] No, not realy.
Thousands of people can just as easily use the binaries he produced, either way it's just as simple for 99.995% of people that would end up using it.
It's why DMCA/DRM is pointless for protecting copyrighted data. Only one person needs to know how to break the data protections, then everybody else can have a copy of the data since it's possible to replicate digital data infinately.
were it not for the fact that CopyBot was free software. Posted Dec 22, 2006 17:08 UTC (Fri) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954) [Link] The article seems to be talking about the problem of people removing the disclaimer and putting in taunts. I'm not sure why that's a significant problem, but it is a problem that probably would not exist if not for the fact that CopyBot was free software (or maybe I should be more specific: usable-source-available software). To patch a binary to do that would be costly enough that it probably wouldn't have happened.
|
|||||||||||||