> Freedom and justice. It's your work, you decide.
>
> Don't get me wrong. I run software all the time that was written a/o
> is still being written by people who charge nothing for it; as an old
> retired fart on a small pension, I probably couldn't run anything else if I
> tried. I'm intensely glad that so many people who can write code are so
> generous with it.
>
> But unless they own their work, how can they choose to give it away?
I don't disagree that artists "own" their work in some real moral sense.
However, I don't believe copyright was created to guarantee freedom
and justice, though justice may have been a side effect from time to
time.
I think copyright was created as a compromise, that society would cede
certain "rights" to authors of certain types of works (i.e., we'll be
willing to enforce already common social conventions by law on your
behalf) in exchange for the net benefit to society of encouraging
their increased cultural and intellectual output.
It's important, and deliberate, that a person was required to seek
copyright, that it only covered certain types of work, that it was for
only 14 years renewable once by a living author, and that a copy had
to be archived in the library of congress, thus ensuring the work's
availability to the public.
I think it was understood that monopolies are dangerous and ultimately
harmful and anti-competitive, and so monopolies were issued
conservatively, were limited in scope, and required the copyrighted
work to be given to "the people" up front as a precondition.
I feel copyright is now failing at, if not actively working against,
its original intent.
And it's doing a pretty lousy job at protecting our freedoms and
justice, too. ;-)
It's *almost* as if money buys you laws in this country.
> If you follow several lists and forums, as I expect you do, you must
> notice that many of those who post to them also make their living writing
> code. Some few, like the RedHat employees at Fedora, may be getting paid to
> give their work away. Others create some software at work, and some at home
> -- and contribute what they do at home to the cause.
>
> If they weren't being paid for what they write for their employers,
> what would they live on?
At the risk of sounding like I'm just looking for ways to be contrary
(I'm not, I'm just enjoying an interesting conversation):
I don't think coders are being paid for a manufactured good, code.
They're being paid for their time, for the privilege of having all
their skills, expertise and experience focused on solving your
problems.
Most code doesn't end up packaged up and sold to anyone.
> --
> Beartooth Implacable, Curmudgeonly Codger Learning Linux
> On the Internet, you can never tell who is a dog --
> supposing you care -- but you can tell who has a mind.
Simón
_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug
No comments:
Post a Comment