At 1:32 PM +0100 11/23/00, Felix von Leitner wrote:
>Thus spake Raul Miller ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>> Picking up a leaflet does not involve making a copy of it.
>
>> Pulling something off of a web site involves creating a copy on your
>> local machine.
>
>Please enlighten me: who bullshitted you Americans into believing that
>one needs a license to use software? Or that software is patentable?
>
>And how did he go about this feat?
>
>The bullshit level of this comes close to major religions (who tell you
>that there is an invisible man in the sky who makes you rot in hell if
>you believe in other gods, but he also loves you).
>
Ah, Felix, welcome to the wonderful world of capitalism! I'm
American and I don't believe I need a license to use software. I
simply have no LEGAL choice. Money being a religion unto itself,
everyone's in the software game for the money. There IS a certain
amount of sense to it...why spend countless hours pounding out code
and never realizing any financial gain from your efforts? I suppose
that's great and groovy if you're independently wealthy or have no
family or friends, but for most people writing/creating software,
they are doing so as a means of financial support. They therefore
want/need to look out for their interest. If a man sells 10 copies
of his software and it gets installed on 10,000 computers, he's still
only sold and received money for 10 copies. Where's the profit in
that?
And if there's no profit, why do it? It's a question I often ask a
friend of mine. He's a real Open Source zealot (not a Bad Thing!)
and writes/invents all this mind-bogglingly useful software...and
then gives it away!!!!!! This confuses the bejeezus out of me, and
I'm not sure I'll ever fully understand WHY. Not being a
prrogrammer, I guess I'll never realize the sense of prestige or
satisfaction one gets out of putting 1's and 0's together in an order
that no one ever has before. But just because there is no physical
result or manifestation of one's toilings, does than mean, as you,
sir, seem to imply, that one is not deserving of a portion of the
rewards (financial or otherwise) reaped from the use of one's
inventions or ideas? I think that's the whole point. If there's
nothing to be gained by doing something, then why do it? I guess
that's the whole idea. We are all, after all, rational self
maximizers; there's no such thing as a selfless deed.
What, Felix, (and you probably ought to respond offline, should you
be so inclined, as this has precious little to do with qmail) do you
suggest? How should the software "empires" of this world make their
money if not by charging for their software and protecting the
license (bought and paid for permission to use it) that goes along
with it? I'm genuinely curious.
Sincerely,
...ROMeyn
--
signat-url: http://www2.potsdam.edu/dctm/prescor/signat-url.htm
cubiclecam: http://digirom.potsdam.edu/~prescor/cubiclecam.html
^^^ <--- New and improved!
