Novell sees a 'both-source' future

TalkBack 37 of 51:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

I Don't See Where I Was Wrong

i only pointed it out cause is was a good point to how his whole analogy was flawed...
let's go back ot his argument rather than his analogy then:
{i]Socialized OSS masquerades as a proponent of freedom (just like its political counterpart) by promoting the giving away of ones own software property (and rights) which is the basis for individual prosperity.
He starts off by acting like OSS is some kind of conspiracy trying to make everyone say they can't copyright their own works. OSS is instated saying, "here you can use my work, but you can't claim it as yours," in it's basest form. The rules of OSS are about the permission you have when you use someone else's work and the conditions you have to follow to use it freely.

It is true that the GPL does not supersede copyright law, and that when someone GPLs his work, that person still technically owns it. However, for all intents and purposes, when someone GPLs his work, he subscribes to a process consistent with communist principles. And those principles are that he can no longer effectively (as an individual), dictate restrictions on the use of his software, because the cat is out of the bag. Anyone who receives that person?s software under the GPL can do anything he wants with it, consistent with the framework outlined by the GPL. That person can sell or modify it anyway that he pleases - again, within the criteria of the GPL. Therefore when someone GPLs his work, he effectively gives away his property (and rights) to that property under a model of community ownership, similar to what is found in communist countries.

There is also the fact that no all companies make money by managing their IP... some companies writes software to get work done...

When you create and sell IP (e.g. software), this is form of managing it. (After all, you are managing its distribution and sale.)

Do i even need to go into detail about his further delusions abotu how OSS is akin to the Soviet Union? How OSS is going to slowly errode at the rights of people to have closed software? Or the fact that, even then, he still doesn't recognize the different between democracy and capitalism?


Whether a regime forcibly takes away your property rights or you give them away, is incidental to the point I?m making. The popularization of GPL OSS leads to the effective loss of individuals? software property rights ? through individuals giving them away. In a sense, individuals effectively giving away their property rights is more disturbing than it being taken away from them ? because it shows them giving away a right their forebears fought hard to provide them. As for the difference between democracy and capitalism: it is democratic societies that usually stipulate property rights upon which capitalism thrives.

Posted by: P. Douglas   Posted on: 09/13/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• The Impact of Virtualization Software on Operating Environments VMware Today's use of virtualization technology allows IT professionals to ... Download Now
• The True Costs of Virtual Server Solutions VMware In an economic environment that is repeatedly heralding the message "do ... Download Now
• Building the Virtualized Enterprise with VMware Iinfrastructure VMware VMware virtualization software has been adopted by over 120,000 enterprise ... Download Now