Subj : Re: GNU Public Licences Revisited (again) To : comp.programming From : Antoon Pardon Date : Tue Sep 20 2005 07:52 am Op 2005-09-19, Steve O'Hara-Smith schreef : > On 19 Sep 2005 12:25:13 GMT > Antoon Pardon wrote: > >> Op 2005-09-16, Chris Sonnack schreef : >> > David Golden writes: >> > >> >> If beer is taken, less beer remains. Beer number conservation. If >> >> a copy of a beer is taken, that's more beer in the world. Beer number >> >> nonconservation. >> > >> > If I have created the beer and am selling it to feed my family and you >> > copy it rather than buy it, you are *stealing* from me. You are actively >> > taking food from my family. >> >> How does that differ from me, just brewing my own? > > I think the key factor here is the recipe - assume that Chris has > a particularly good recipe for beer and is making a living brewing beer > to that recipe. I could have a good recipe too, just as others. Maybe Chris got his his idea for a recipe from a public source. >> As far as I understand, me brewing my own or me copying yours, leave >> you in exactly the same situation. You don't have any less in either > > If you are copying - ie. brewing to the same recipe then you are > depriving Chris of exclusivity. If you are brewing your own beer to a > different recipe then that is fine. But depriving someone of exclusivity, is not the same as stealing. If I am the owner of something, in general it is pretty clear I am the only person with rights concerning the property. However if I know something, it is not at all that clear that I should be the only one with rigths concerning this knowledge. So arguments that try to treat knowledge as a form of property are IMO bound to fail. -- Antoon Pardon .