On Mon, 2009-01-12 at 22:52 -0500, Quiliro Ordóñez wrote: > > > 2009/1/12 Ted Smith <[email protected]> > Did you mean to take this off-list? > > > Woops....no! > > > On Mon, 2009-01-12 at 21:59 -0500, Quiliro Ordóñez wrote: > > > > > > 2009/1/12 Ted Smith <[email protected]> > > On Mon, 2009-01-12 at 21:47 -0500, Quiliro Ordóñez > wrote: > > > Sorry, correction > > > > > > No copyright, no need of the GPL. ;-) > > > > > > > If there's no copyright, we can't magically summon > source from > > anywhere. > > We can just copy binaries without any persecution. > In the > > meantime, > > software hoarders will take free source code and put > shackles > > on it. > > > > ¿How? > > > > By releasing it under non-free terms, refusing to provide > source, etc. > > Isn't this what they do already? > Yup. See a reason why they'd stop? > > The only thing they would be unable to do is prosecute us for > copying > binaries. You can't get source from reverse-engineering. > > You can't do that with non free software either but you would be able > to legally reverse engineer. > ..which would not get us source, so the software would still be non-free unless very large efforts were put towards reverse-engineering. In the meantime, purveyors of non-free software would be able to effect the same restrictions (and more) via contracts, which allow much more expansive restrictions compared to copyrights. > > > > > Without copyright, our movement would die. It's not > secret > > that current > > copyright law is downright orwellian, but we still > need > > something to > > keep things free. > > > > With no copyright, all software would be free or at least > would be > > reverse engineerable. > > > We wouldn't have source, and reverse engineering is not an > equal to > that. ReactOS is a good example. > > No it is not. Once software is free under a free license, whoever got > it alwas¡ys will have that part as free software. Whoever got it as > nonfree without copyright would be able to at least execute and > reverse engineer. Much better than before.....don't you think. > Now. But all of those free licenses would lose all power in a "world without copyright". Whoever gets it as free software will be free, but we'd lose the very effective tool of copyleft. What would you rather have, the right to reverse-engineer things, or the GPL?
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ gNewSense-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnewsense-users
