begin quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED] as of Wed, Nov 22, 2006 at 10:43:21AM -0800: > On Tue, Nov 21, 2006 at 06:04:18PM -0800, Stewart Stremler wrote: [snip] > > Copy-protection technology isn't part of a (decent) copyright system; > > rather, it's what's used when the copyright system can't enforce > > copyrights. We'd see *more* copy protection. > > Well how would you propose to enforce copyrights then? Law.
(That's a really dumb question.) > > Indeed. The abolition of copyright would mean that nobody would ship > > software unless it was copy-protected. Anyone who did would find that > > their software was stolen, improved upon, and then sold, with copy > > protection... > > I'm still waiting Oh, spin on it. > for why you think BSD/APL/MIT/X11 licensed software > developers aren't a counter-argument to this assertion. Why would Apache & > OpenBSD developers lose ALL their motivation tomorrow if copyright was > abolished? Tomorrow? No. In three years? Quite possibly. -- _ |\_ \| -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
