LINUX Message Board - Msg: 12257377

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : LINUX

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Mitch Blevins who wrote (1918)	12/11/1999 12:52:00 AM
From: JC Jaros	Read Replies (1) of 2617

Hi Mitch. That was a nice post. Yeah, I somewhat set up a strawman there, but it began after reading one too many yammerings about 'licenses' coming from community enthusiasts, specifically Bruce Perens going off on the SCSL one place and justifying himself elsewhere using the rhetoric of RHAT stock price. I want to offer up an argument to the RHAT stock price in the form of this question of Public Domain. PD works and has a long tradition in both folk music and software. I'd like to know where John Perry Barlow comes down on this. --Regarding the concert stenographer; don't get me started. You've already got me thinking of a trinary arrangement where 'folk' music could be performed and consumed in a single experience (quantum folk music <g>). I didn't say all software should be public domain. Probably most software we deal with directly should. Otherwise the other traditional 'profit motive' is cooperatively addressed in the SCSL. I guess what I'm saying is between PD and SCSL (or similar), GPL is kinda redundant. Why is 'copyright' all that important? Most of the crap that's copyrighted shouldn't be. How does copyright encourage the production of anything? I watched software weave it's way into US Code 17 (Copyright) over the years, and it's treated pretty much like music. The difference is each programmer feels compelled to paste a long laundry list of (usually unenforcable) TERMS into readme file. Why? I don't know. I go buy music CD, I don't have to wade through all of that. Why do programmers feel they need to strike out into new Uniform Commercial Code territory every time they write a program? Why is 'increased production' neccessary? I think all software should come with source code. I've thought that (and lived it) back when 'open source' was plain ol' freeware, and we wouldn't even *consider a BBS program that didn't come with the source code. It was after all, practically an operating system in itself. Hey there's an example (and I'm sure there's more than one); Telegard BBS was WWIV BBS after 'folk process'. Actually STEALING code has a much richer history in encouraging production. The Perl license is cool. You don't have to read about it all the time and worry about compliance. What's wrong with the Perl license? :) -JCJ

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next