On Thu, 2009-04-23 at 18:06 -0700, Michael M. Moore wrote: > MJang wrote: > > On Wed, 2009-04-22 at 17:10 -0700, Michael M. Moore wrote: > > > > > > But in any case, the current position is in support of capitalism, right > > or wrong. > > I disagree. The current position is in support of corporatism, not > capitalism.
snip - Dear Michael (Moore), I appreciate the additional information. My only quibble here is that in today's US, corporatism is indistinguishable from capitalism, at least in terms of current politically acceptable discourse. > I would urge you to read Justice Breyer's excellent dissenting opinion > in [1] Eldred v. Ashcroft for a more comprehensive and eloquent view of > ways in which our copyright regime has overextended itself. At least some recognize the difference. My previous statements on this issue reflect what I think is (and isn't) realistically possible. > > In addition, any change to copyright laws would also change the effect > > of the GPL, as it is also a copyright (copyleft) license. And a time > > limit would allow others to bring older GPL code into proprietary > > software. > > Authors of GPL'ed software have no more right to impose their world view > on the progress of humanity for the next 100-150 years than do authors > of proprietary software. Personally, I'm quite happy when coders do use > the GPL, even happier when they use the BSD license, but it doesn't > elevate them to sainthood or mean that they are entitled to near > perpetual control over how their work is used and by whom. Gosh, it sounds like you're suggesting that the GPL does not elevate Richard Stallman to sainthood. :) No further comment needed. Thanks, Mike _______________________________________________ PLUG mailing list [email protected] http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
