meo@stiatl.UUCP (Miles O'Neal) (11/21/89)
In article <ZMACX07.89Nov16192342@tsun2.doc.ic.ac.uk> zmacx07@doc.ic.ac.uk (Simon E Spero) writes: |The following text is taken from Page 31 The Guardian, Thursday November 16th |1989 without permission.... | ... | | The fact that companies are even attempting to press such claims |shows how commercially important the control of information has |become.... Actually, I think it is merely indicative that we pay toio much attention to the lawyers in this country, and they are quickly becoming the de facto ruling class... |... Stallman |says: "There's a tendency to destructive competition, where instead of |trying to run faster yourself, you try to trip up everyone else". I think that's just the norm in this country anymore. Not that it's right, or that we shouldn't fight it. But it totally transcends the software industry. |The |result is a threat to the benefits that computers are supposed to |confer: " The full fruits of information technology can be realised |only when everyone has the freedom and ability to copy and change |programs" Hmmm. How does this fit in with the concept of intellectual property as the law sees it? Why software, and not patents, for instance? If I develop something, it's mine to do with as I see fit. That shouldn't stop you from developing one, too, but if I develop one, I should have the right to decide whether to give it away (which I might be more likely to if someone is paying me to do it, or purely as a labor of love, or for ego reasons, or any number of other reasons) or to try to make enough money to retire off of it. Stallman doesn't pay my salary, so why should he have any say in the matter? For that matter, an argument could easily be made that the gnu copyleft actually restricts free copying and change... Just some food for thought, which I'm sure some of you will regurgitate all over me, but I'm used to it... -Miles