2011/10/18 Guru गुरु <[email protected]>

> **
>
> On 18/10/11 11:29, Narendra Sisodiya wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 10:46 AM, Vivek Khurana 
> <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>>
>>    Secondly, the NC clause is important in a country like ours where
>> cheap run of the mill institutes mushroom everyday. How do you plan to
>> protect exploitation in case someone downloads the the content from
>> net, burns a DVD and starts selling it at price of his choice. In this
>> scenario, he is building his business on content created out of public
>> money.I think the current license has clause to prevent this.
>>
>
> This is precisely I want to happen. Your arguments are not True. because My
> first question in the list that , -- "Give an example that somebody have
> earned huge profit by selling CC-By-SA or non-NC contents",
> Your argument is valid that --- "*How do you plan to protect exploitation
> in case someone downloads the the content from net, burns a DVD and starts
> selling it at price of his choice*"
>
> There is no need to protect. because EVERYBODY is allowed to do so. If
> Vivek burn and start selling videos than Narendra and many other will also
> start doing so and eventually price will become lower and best quality will
> win.
>
>
> This is good in theory, but not in reality. How is it that Microsoft gets a
> huge premium for its Office suite when comparable office suite is available
> free (to share and free of cost). While the case is black and white in case
> of office, where we have a proprietary software as the leader, what about
> Android - where another large company is able to dominate the android
> development system. So is android 'free'? even if the code is available for
> all purposes, what about the role of google in shaping its course?
>
> Big corporations can use variety of methods to dominate the market and
> drown out the efforts of others. Such large monopolies/oligopolies is far
> more common in the IT sector than in any other. And their domination
> distorts the market so much that it is meaningless to believe that since
> anyone/everyone can enter the market, monopolies cant happen.
>
>
You have totally derailed the topic !!
You are talking about monopoly system and exploitation with proprietary
Goods/Products.
We were discussing something else !!



> There is a need to prevent such practices and hence the NC clause has
> meaning/value. It may be difficult to implement, but then that is true of
> most policies/rules. while software can operate on binaries, policies need
> to be able to cater to different kinds of contexts and needs.
>
> While Ii agree that adding the NC clause makes it 'less free' than not
> having it, I think it is simplistic to argue that a NC clause completely
> makes it non-free and NC is always not desirable
>
_______________________________________________
network mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.fosscom.in/listinfo.cgi/network-fosscom.in

Reply via email to