This is an issue with no real clear answer and has very vocal supporters on both sides. Although on a *nix mailing list (like this one) you are more likely to get opinions leaning towards 'freedom of knowledge is good' you have to be careful as it can turn into a political issue. Personally I am one that feels copyrights should be cut *way* back (especially when software is involved) but it's a tough fight. There are organizations that are working to limit coporations' capability to hold onto copyrights forever. One of the biggest is the Electronic Frontier Foundation, their website is: www.eff.org
Michael Robinson wrote: > I recently decided to download a copy of Full Throttle that runs > on ScummVM from a pirate site. It seems that to get software > for ScummVM you are pretty much stuck downloading it from pirate > sites because anything written for Linux would run on Linux > directly and either a) be open source or b) commercial and > purchasable. I have a copy of full throttle that is legal > for dos which doesn't work so well anymore. > > I agree with the notion that current copyright law in the U.S. > is unethical. Any software program that is neither supported > nor sold should not be locked up by copyright. The purpose > of copyright is to protect the profitability of writing > software. The idea is, it gives you a temporary monopoly > over that piece of software. It seems the temporary is > lost on some people. > > So what is the remedy? Should software go out of copyright > automatically after 10 years if it isn't sold or supported > anymore? Should copyrighted software have to be re- > copyrighted after 10 years for a nominal fee forcing those > who want to abandon a software program to abandon it > properly? I like the copyright is 10 years idea. For > software though, even 10 years may be too long. After > that there should be a per year charge to keep a program > copyrighted IMHO. > > Maybe emulators throw this argument sideways insofar as > old software that is popular could be potentially sold > again with an emulator to make it run on modern hardware. > Thing is, my idea is to make those who want their software > to remain under copyright pay for that privilege after it > has been copyrighted for so many years. > > I justify downloading a pirated copy of Full Throttle because > I have one, but what about old games like Warcraft I that I > never did buy a copy of? That can be downloaded too from > many abandonware sites. Heck, even Warcraft II can be > downloaded which seems wrong considering that I bought a > copy not too long ago. > > I think the way copyright has been traditionally used when it > comes to software creates a major problem. The old idea of property > where you own the property forever doesn't make sense when one is > talking about software. Microsoft has a monopoly. If Windows 95 > fell into the public domain because it isn't supported or sold by > Microsoft and it is over 10 years old, would that still remain true? > How about Windows 3.x, it isn't an OS per se, but shouldn't it be in > the public domain? Old versions of MS-DOS and Windows are easy to > get a hold of from abandonware and pirate sites, illegally that is > without the source. > > Shouldn't someone who wants to compete with Microsoft directly either > via a commercially sold OS or an OSS OS be allowed access to the source > code of old versions of MS-DOS and Windows? > > > _______________________________________________ > PLUG mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug > -- Do not be afraid to joust a giant just because some people insist on believing in windmills. _______________________________________________ PLUG mailing list [email protected] http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
