Subj : Re: GNU Public Licences Revisited (again) To : comp.programming From : Randy Howard Date : Wed Sep 21 2005 11:39 pm Arthur J. O'Dwyer wrote (in article ): >> The value of something that you create (such as beer) is partly determined >> by how much effort is expended in creating it. > > Labor value of goods? I think one of the major problems in this thread > is that half the participants (David, Antoon, myself, perhaps Richard) > don't believe in the labor value of goods, and half (Gerry, yourself, > Chris, perhaps Randy) do. I won't pretend to speak for any of the other participants, but I do believe that it costs time (and therefore, indirectly money) to develop products, of whatever type. Many also require physical items, electricity, property in which to work, the hiring of additional people, licensing of third party technologies and tools, etc. As such, when you release a product, it has cost you something, in some cases a great deal to get to that point. There is a reason that people talk about ways to "recoup development costs". It's not just for fun. If you ever manage to run your own business, you'll quickly find out how "not free beer" the real world is. > I don't care how many years it took you to > develop your new and improved sporkula; if it's not useful to me it's not > valuable to me. The point is not whether or not it is valuable to /you/. If it is valuable to me, directly, or through revenue from selling it to others that find it valuable, it doesn't matter what you think about it, all that is required is that you not think you have the ludicrous right to simply take it for yourself, because I don't have a right to charge for something that I spent weeks, months or years developing. Just because it may be sold in a form that makes it technically possible to copy, does not mean that it is ok to do it. It's technically possible for me to burn your house down too, but I shouldn't. > The concept of "intrinsic value" is also a dangerous one, in my view; > "value" in a capitalist system is determined by market value, not by > "effort." You may be confusing capitalism with Tee-ball. ;-) You seem to be completely ignoring the class of commercial businesses called "service industries". Not every "product" has a physical aspect, tee-ball references notwithstanding. > So in your view: Making a copy by expending a lot of effort is hard > work, and is all right. Making a copy by expending little effort is easy, > and is theft. Totally wrong. Making an /authorized/ copy is ok. I can't believe you don't grok this. -- Randy Howard (2reply remove FOOBAR) .