goer@quads.uchicago.edu (Richard L. Goerwitz) (10/05/90)
Jmaynard@thesis1.hsch.utexas.edu (Jay Maynard) writes: >>Oh I see now. It's like this: I develop a new drug that will perhaps >>help many people. But I want to sell it in such a way that I can hide >>the actual chemical structure of the compound. After all, it is "my >>property." >Ever hear of drug patents? (Boy, are we ever far afield now!) Sure. Patents are part of the public record. Patented or not, I wouldn't willingly take any drug whose ingredients were kept a big secret. The basic misconception here is that the FSF is invading your sacrosanct property rights. You can certainly do what you want with your own pro- perty. As soon as you try to sell me that property, though, my rights as a buyer start to come into the picture. The FSF is simply trying to uphold my right as a buyer to know what is in the products that I purchase. What you seem to want is to be able to ride into town with your wagon of mystery potions, and to have everyone buy them from you on faith. Sure, most people will take your word for it that the potions work. There will be a few, though, who challenge you. You don't want to have to reveal your secret formulas to those people. Is this right? -Richard