The really scarey part about this quote is that the more judges rule in
favor of people like the RIAA and the MPAA, there *IS* case law to
justify this opinion. The more that politicians are "educated" (a.k.a
bribed, I mean, lobbied) by monopolies like Microsoft, there will be
legislation to justify it. And, the more companies claim to support open
source projects while their real goal is to steal it and somehow make it
proprietary (see the history of ISS Inc.), there will be good arguments
against us. Many of the companies that claim to support OSS come out
with statements like "What open source needs is <fill in the blank>",
which gives credibility to the idea that OSS needs corporate direction
in order to be good.
Kenny
Jeffry Smith wrote:
> Yep. Same thing with the RIAA and MPAA. Anyone read Heinlein's first short
> story "Lifeline?" In it, the protagonist develops a machine that will tell
> someone how long they will live (to the minute). The insurance companies take
> him to court. The judge in the case says "There's a perception that has
> developed that, because someone has been making money from an industry for a
> period of time, they are entitled to that. I can find nothing in the
> constitution, statute, or case law to justify that belief. Case dismissed."
**********************************************************
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the
*body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter:
unsubscribe gnhlug
**********************************************************
