Lol, yes, I think everyone except hax and a couple of others would agree. The analogy still works, though...
DaVinci should've been able to export / backup the Mona Lisa. I'm still not allowed to take the original out of the museum though it's not mine even though I gave him the brushes. --GC On 03/16/2010 06:19 PM, Gareth Nelson wrote: > On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 10:03 PM, Glen Canaday<gcana...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> The Gimp is free software but the pictures made with it aren't unless >> that right is given by the creator. Same as in SL. And that's the major >> point that brings the whole copyright / theft discussion back on topic >> for the list. Seems a few lurkers are thinking that they own the hole >> they've been digging themselves into. I'm all for free tools - the Mona >> Lisa could have been painted with free brushes or magic special >> Microsoft brushes - but that doesn't mean that because I gave DaVinci >> the brush, canvas, and paints that I'm free to take the art out of the >> Louvre. >> > I'd be inclined to say that this is a bad analogy - what's closer is > whether you can paint your own mona lisa, or otherwise copy it - > you'll not find support for actual theft from me :) > > But back on topic - regardless of all our unique individual political > views on copyright, it's definitely a bad bad idea for LL to encourage > copyright infringement on their platform - or anything illegal for > that matter - this is something we can agree on, yes? > > I'd hope another thing to be agreed on is that it's not good to > implement strong DRM measures and cripple legit users while at most > slowing down temporarily those who want to break the rules - yay or > nay? > > > _______________________________________________ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
