[GRLUG] Itunes and France

[david at pembrook.net]

We can all see that the current laws need some serious work and I agree in
principal with a lot of whats has been said but I don't agree everything
must be in the public domain.

Open source is about choice and freedom is it not? I have many choices
right now (thankfully in a large part to open source). One of my choices
is to buy into a propritary system if I choose to. Once I do, I know what
the deal is. If MS or Apple want to change things, so be it... those are
the rules in the proprietary world. You play there , you play with those
rules.

A lot of here use products every day from both camps. Some by choice, some
because their companies tell them too. Someone made that choice either way
and they have to live with that.

If you don't like the kid down the streets rules, don't play with his toys.

Thats all I'm saying... I don't want my freedom to choose or create a
proprietary work taken from me.

That said, I don't like monopolies, I like open standards, I'm all for
sharing code and information.

Dave


> David Pembrook wrote:
>> But are you saying that a company does not have a right to make
>> something and own it? I love open source and thats a choice for me and
>> many others. But if I make something the world wants, do they have a
>> right to it by demanding it from me? Are intelectual rights obsolete?
>>
>
> According to our patent and copyright laws: No.
>
> That may seem bad, but those laws reflect HOW new works are created -
> namely new works aren't "created".  When an author writes a story, a
> musician writes music, a programmer developers software, they all dip
> into the public domain.  They all use prior art to build their works
> on.  They are less "creators" and more "builders".  They take what's
> already been done and rearrange it, use it differently and make
> something different.
>
> We add to the mix the fact that monopolies have been proven to be bad
> things.
>
> So the patent and copyright laws were created to balance the bad (i.e. a
> limited monopoly for a limited time) with the good (i.e. getting access
> to new works and making money for their builders).
>
> The concept of "Intellectual Property" never existed until recently.
> This concept lets the co-called "creators" treat their ideas as property
> - with all the rights included with that.  Like ownership after death.
> Like being able to pass the ownership of that idea on to your heirs.
> This is inherently wrong with anything intellectual.  Ideas are not
> physical and ownership of them causes long term problems (like nearly
> all the issues we are having with patent trolls and copyright hogs).
>
> And I'll remind you what the government did with Standard Oil and AT&T.
>
> --
> Ron Lauzon - rlauzon at acm dot org
>    Homepage: http://7lauzon.home.comcast.net/
>    Weblog: http://ronsapartment.blogspot.com/
>
>    DNRC: Lord of All Things That Are Fattening
>
>    "To be sure, conservative radio talk show hosts have a built-in
>    audience unavailable to liberals: People driving cars to some
>    sort of job." - Ann Coulter
>
> Microsoft Free since July 06, 2001
> Running Mandriva Linux 2006
>
> _______________________________________________
> grlug mailing list
> grlug at grlug.org
> http://shinobu.grlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/grlug
>