Subj : Re: GNU Public Licences Revisited (again)
To   : comp.programming
From : David Golden
Date : Sun Aug 28 2005 01:47 pm

Gerry Quinn wrote:


> "Why is this? As the majority of hobbyists must be aware, most of you
> steal your software. Hardware must be paid for, but software is
> something to share. Who cares if the people who worked on it get paid?
> 

Bill Gates is no doubt capable of mendacity (and asserts that people
"steal" software, presupposing it's valid to consider it stolen): 

People even then WERE paid for _writing_ software, where the real work
is in software. But is it fair people instead get paid, over and again,
for copies of software they've already written, thanks to distribution
monopoly? (rhetorical, obviously you think so)

So: we have a market with a policy intervention of the creation of an
extra monopoly right above the free state of the market where
programming would be a service. Now, don't confuse socialism
(politics), with communism (economics): someone executing a socialistic
welfare policy of interference in a natural market so that information
pattern creators can earn their conception of a "rightful" amount above
(or merely assumed by them to be above) that which a market without
their interference might yield might well use a new monopoly right as a
tool to do so.

Aside: in all this, I note that words like "socialism" and "communism"
are probably less evil sounding to me than to you in the first place
given my non-USA upbringing...

.