On Friday 23 June 2006 21:22, Timothy Miller wrote: > On 6/23/06, Dieter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > But apparently we're all pirates and can't be > > > trusted with devices that actually talk to each other. > > > > A pirate commits armed robbery on the high seas. > > > > Copyright infringement is wrong, assuming one can figure out what is > > and is not "fair use", but is hardly comparable to armed robbery. >
[with you so far] > > I've never bought into those arguments that it's okay to copy digital > material because it doesn't cost any extra just to make a copy. Oh, I > agree that it's hard to put in the same class as, say, a Fabergee egg > or something else with tangible presence. But the work and > craftsmanship that goes into developing a good piece of software > should be shown no less respect than what went into a piece of art. > Being easier to copy doesn't enter into it. Should we be allowed to > make and distribute as many copies as we like of a Picasso painting? Ah... Aren't Picasso's out of copyright? I though he'd been dead for long enough that copyright had expired on his works... Not trying to start an argument or anything... Just my usual pedantic self. H
pgpssVsU85fGX.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
