oster@dewey.soe.berkeley.edu (David Phillip Oster) (05/07/88)
It is immoral to steal software by duplicating it without paying the
designers. The reason it is immmoral is that if you use a dup, instead of
paying for the design, then you penalize the designers, and so discourage
innovation. If you've got matter duplicators, then the fact the designers
make less monry is less important: if I can trade copies of designs for
edible copies of food, then getting money for my designs is less
important. But, it is still important: so long as matter duplicators
require power, and so long as they take up space and we have to pay rent
on the space, then I'm still going to need to sell my designs.
I simply can't afford to make a living as a designer, trading designs
for designs and using a matter duplicator to turn designs into food and
clothing, so long as I have to buy power to run my duplicator, and pay
rent to have a place to put my stuff.
Copyright (c) 1988 by David Phillip Oster, All Rights Reserved
--- David Phillip Oster --When you asked me to live in sin with you
Arpa: oster@dewey.soe.berkeley.edu --I didn't know you meant sloth.
Uucp: {uwvax,decvax,ihnp4}!ucbvax!oster%dewey.soe.berkeley.edumwm@eris (Mike (My watch has windows) Meyer) (05/07/88)
In article <23935@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> oster@dewey.soe.berkeley.edu.UUCP (David Phillip Oster) writes:
<I simply can't afford to make a living as a designer, trading designs
<for designs and using a matter duplicator to turn designs into food and
<clothing, so long as I have to buy power to run my duplicator, and pay
<rent to have a place to put my stuff.
That's why I make arrangements to get paid for the hours I spend
designing (time being something else you can't take from a matter
duplicator). That way, I get dollars to pay for the power/space the
duplicator uses, and designs that I can then trade for designs for
food and clothing (and new hardware, and new software, and etc.)
<mike
--
But I'll survive, no you won't catch me, Mike Meyer
I'll resist the urge that is tempting me, ucbvax!mwm
I'll avert my eyes, keep you off my knee, mwm@berkeley.edu
But it feels so good when you talk to me. mwm@ucbjade.BITNETbrad@looking.UUCP (Brad Templeton) (05/07/88)
In article <23935@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> oster@dewey.soe.berkeley.edu.UUCP (David Phillip Oster) writes: >It is immoral to steal software by duplicating it without paying the >designers. The reason it is immmoral is that if you use a dup, instead of >paying for the design, then you penalize the designers, and so discourage >innovation. Actually, this is probably why it's illegal. It's immoral, by one school of thought, because the software *belongs* to its creator, and you shouldn't do things with other people's creations and property without their permission. Money doesn't have to enter into it. I could write a piece of software exclusively for my friends, or for any other specific subset of folks, and not charge them for that use. It would still be wrong for you to take a copy if I haven't said you could have one. Think of how the authors of the "free distribution but copyright" software, or the GNU folks do it. If you take the software, and do something prohibited by the creator (like charge for it), you aren't depriving them of a dime, but you still shouldn't do it. Depriving the author of the right to charge for use of software is only one of the things you do when copying software. What you're really depriving the author of is the right to control the products of his or her own mind. (Besides, the $ argument often leads to stupid rationalizations, like, "I wouldn't have bought it anyway, so I'm not doing anything wrong." or "They charge an obscene amount, so I'm stealing it for justice." or "If they would charge a fair, media cost+ type price for the software, nobody would pirate it, just like nobody tapes record albums.") -- Brad Templeton, Looking Glass Software Ltd. - Waterloo, Ontario 519/884-7473