Subj : Re: GNU Public Licences Revisited (again)
To   : comp.programming
From : David Golden
Date : Thu Aug 25 2005 10:33 pm

Gerry Quinn wrote:


> Contrary to your nonsensical argument, free 
> markets *depend* on the notion of property.
> 
Free markets for things notionally property do...  If we don't consider
software to be property in the first place, that's irrelevant.

I thought it was reasonably clear I was talking about a software market
from a programmer's perspective as a service provider: We can offer the
service of writing new programs or developing existing programs in
various directions, or even "just" auditing and bugfixing them and
warranting they're okay (that last one only to paying customers unless
you're completely mad...), even in the complete absence of copyright
law, which we might want to abandon for ethical reasons (like slavery
was abandoned). 

*Software market as a service market*.  Got it? Good programmers will
still do okay in such a market (IMHO better) when copyright and patent
law is abolished.

If you treat people as property, obviously a free market for such slaves
might depend for its existence on the ability to treat people as
property.  If you don't allow treatment of people as property, but do
treat people's work as valuable, the market for people's labour doesn't
depend for its existence on the ability to treat people as property
(but would likely be strongly affected by its presence...)

.