I think you bring up an important point about how software will transform into services over the web. This is a trend that is obvious and will have an effect on how people think about the issues of copyright and software. Also, it would be nice to see a stronger demand among consumers for source code (and the right to change it) as you saw back in the BBS days.
"Contractual social engineering" is an ugly phrase because it brings up images of politicians and lawyers, which I'm sure we can all agree are the lowest form of life <ng>. But it is exactly what happens when the government enforces property rights for physical goods and land. Most advocates of Adam Smith's "Invisible Hand" of the free-market economy will support enforcement of physical property rights.
However, not all free-market advocates would agree about the application of property rights to intellectual works or to information...
On one hand, by treating information like property, you allow it to be created and distributed under the capatalist free-market system, which is assumed to be the best/most-efficient method of doing things.
On the other hand, in order to enforce property rights on information, the government must help enforce a monopoly for the author on the use and distribution of that information. Since information does not suffer from the same limitations as physical goods (only one person can use it at a time), this is sometimes seen as excessive government interference in an otherwise free market.
It is difficult to imagine what the software market would look like if copyright had never existed, or had never been applied to software. But it would make an interesting "Twilight Zone" episode to try.
-Mitch
Re: Merl Saunders. Never heard of him. I'm afraid that I don't know much about folk music (especially compared with the folks on this thread). |
