Subj : Re: GNU Public Licences Revisited (again)
To   : comp.programming
From : David Golden
Date : Fri Aug 26 2005 08:32 pm


> is authoring a book a service?  
Yes.
> Is an actor's performance a service? 
Yes.

> How about a music album" 
>
No.  A copy of a music album is a thing, an information pattern
impressed upon a substrate.  "A music album" is an abstract information
pattern. The composition of a music album would be a service.

Not my fault if composers charge far too little for their composition
services.

I disagree with nearly all copyright and patent law, not just as applied
to software. (patent law annoys me more than copyright law, of course,
as it also prohibits independent creation).

I don't think a book author, and certainly not a book publisher, should
have the right to restrict redistribution any more than a software
author.

(I've already stated I believe they should have the right to
be recognised as the author a work, thus being able to sue a plagiarist.
This particular "moral right" is independent of copyright, and would
mean that people know to  go to the correct author for the service of
composition of further books or software.)
  
> Exactly why I rarely touch free software anymore.  It might be
> good, it might be crap.

Which is why Free (AS IN LIBRE, NOT GRATIS - English vocabulary is
deficient) software from known sources prepared to vouch for its
goodness and accept responsibility if it fails IS paid for.

.