> Initially, back in 50s-60s-70s all software was free software I've read that while programs may not have been covered by copyright, they were frequently covered by contracts promising the wrath of the selling company if there were copies made.
> This lead us to the important point. Free software is not a > gift. It is not a benefaction from a generous programmers to a > clueless users. Free software is a reconstruction of normal mode of > operation on top of [unjust] copyright law. I don't see how stating the fact that the law has changed means that the law is now wrong. It may be controversial around here, but I would strongly disagree with your statement. There are certainly advantages to the communal development of software that free software permits, but that doesn't mean that there's any moral superiority or inferiority to creating free software over non-free software. -- __________________________________________________________ Sign-up for your own personalized E-mail at Mail.com http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup CareerBuilder.com has over 400,000 jobs. Be smarter about your job search http://corp.mail.com/careers
