On Tue, Aug 07, 2012 at 06:48:39PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> The best thing is to be an anarchist!
apt-get install anarchism :)
--
"If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people
who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the
oppressing." --- Malcolm
On 8/8/12, John Hasler wrote:
> I wrote:
>> Thus you have a monopoly on the reproduction of copies of your work.
>
> Celajar writes:
>> Okay, but this is veering close to sophistry; I can also say that any
>> private ownership of property is monopolistic, since it gives the
>> owner a monopoly on
On 8/8/12, John Hasler wrote:
> Celejar writes:
>> I can say the same about the very institution of private property; it
>> creates a monopoly (only I have the legal right to use a particular
>> piece of property) where none would otherwise exist, and that is its
>> very purpose.
>
> You and I can
Celejar writes:
> I can say the same about the very institution of private property; it
> creates a monopoly (only I have the legal right to use a particular
> piece of property) where none would otherwise exist, and that is its
> very purpose.
You and I cannot eat the same apple. We can both hav
On Tue, 2012-08-07 at 23:09 -0400, Celejar wrote:
> I do think we may have a language barrier here.
Indeed, my fault, since my English is broken. If you and I would try to
detect a consensus, we could hire a translator, but cooperation between
countries seems to be impossible. If we won't have pat
On Tue, 07 Aug 2012 20:52:13 -0500
John Hasler wrote:
> I wrote:
> > Thus you have a monopoly on the reproduction of copies of your work.
>
> Celajar writes:
> > Okay, but this is veering close to sophistry; I can also say that any
> > private ownership of property is monopolistic, since it give
I wrote:
> Thus you have a monopoly on the reproduction of copies of your work.
Celajar writes:
> Okay, but this is veering close to sophistry; I can also say that any
> private ownership of property is monopolistic, since it gives the
> owner a monopoly on the use of some particular piece of prop
On Tue, 07 Aug 2012 18:03:29 -0500
John Hasler wrote:
> Celejar writes:
> > You are perfectly free to create your own work and compete with me for
> > the same audiences and dollars; the only thing you can't do is copy
> > _my_ work.
>
> Thus you have a monopoly on the reproduction of copies of
> > Celejar writes: the only thing you can't do is copy
Btw. I'm also against copying, if somebody makes knowledge available for
free (as in bear) and other folks copy it, "close the free" knowledge
and take money!
I don't like money! I prefer exchange and altruism. Yes, bankers have
nothing to
On Tue, 2012-08-07 at 18:03 -0500, John Hasler wrote:
> Celejar writes:
> > You are perfectly free to create your own work and compete with me for
> > the same audiences and dollars; the only thing you can't do is copy
> > _my_ work.
>
> Thus you have a monopoly on the reproduction of copies of yo
Celejar writes:
> You are perfectly free to create your own work and compete with me for
> the same audiences and dollars; the only thing you can't do is copy
> _my_ work.
Thus you have a monopoly on the reproduction of copies of your work.
--
John Hasler
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-use
On Tue, 7 Aug 2012 20:45:33 +0300
Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Ma, 07 aug 12, 09:47:11, Celejar wrote:
> >
> > They do - but the first quote in your message was Yaro's. I guess you
> > decided to respond to a quote of mine as cited in his email, instead of
> > responding directly to my email. In s
On Tue, 7 Aug 2012 20:43:54 +0300
Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Ma, 07 aug 12, 09:39:54, Celejar wrote:
> >
> > > to be very important/inovative/etc. actually had a hard time getting
> > > published. How many others did not make it?
> >
> > Not sure what you're saying here - do you mean that the
On Tue, 07 Aug 2012 11:11:07 -0500
John Hasler wrote:
> I wrote:
> > If you don't want those to whom you sell copies of your work to make
> > additional copies induce them to sign a contract in which they agree
> > not to do so.
>
> Celejar writes:
>
> > But property rights are treated as funda
On Tue, 2012-08-07 at 12:24 -0500, John Hasler wrote:
> Ralf writes:
> > The best thing is to be an anarchist!
>
> Anarchy is impossible. Some jerk will always jump up and crown himself
> king. Government is not a necessary evil: it is an inevitable one. The
> best we can hope for is to minimiz
Andrei writes:
> I did not question the legitimacy, but the future-proof-ness of a
> business relying on distributing copies.
Right: these are orthogonal issues. Whether one views the current
copyright regime as legitimate or not, I don't think it has a future.
The work of the publishing industry
On Ma, 07 aug 12, 09:47:11, Celejar wrote:
>
> They do - but the first quote in your message was Yaro's. I guess you
> decided to respond to a quote of mine as cited in his email, instead of
> responding directly to my email. In such a case, I generally delete the
> first name in the chain, but I
On Ma, 07 aug 12, 09:39:54, Celejar wrote:
>
> > to be very important/inovative/etc. actually had a hard time getting
> > published. How many others did not make it?
>
> Not sure what you're saying here - do you mean that the creators
> couldn't publish because there was insufficient perceived i
Ralf writes:
> The best thing is to be an anarchist!
Anarchy is impossible. Some jerk will always jump up and crown himself
king. Government is not a necessary evil: it is an inevitable one. The
best we can hope for is to minimize it.
--
John Hasler
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-r
On Tue, 2012-08-07 at 11:11 -0500, John Hasler wrote:
> I wrote:
> > If you don't want those to whom you sell copies of your work to make
> > additional copies induce them to sign a contract in which they agree
> > not to do so.
>
> Celejar writes:
>
> > But property rights are treated as fundame
I wrote:
> If you don't want those to whom you sell copies of your work to make
> additional copies induce them to sign a contract in which they agree
> not to do so.
Celejar writes:
> But property rights are treated as fundamental, even (especially!) in
> libertarian thought.
And copies are pro
On Tue, 07 Aug 2012 09:34:19 -0500
John Hasler wrote:
> Celejar writes:
> > ...I lean libertarian...
>
> So do I, which is the basis of my criticism of copyright.
>
> > ...if you don't like the terms of the contract, don't sign it...
>
> Right. If you don't want those to whom you sell copies
On Tue, 07 Aug 2012 09:23:50 -0500
John Hasler wrote:
> Celejar writes:
> > Agreed, but I'm not sure how this effects our disagreement about the
> > legitimacy of the (current) intellectual regime. If they feel the
> > value is less than the amount charged by the creators to recoup their
> > cost
Celejar writes:
> ...I lean libertarian...
So do I, which is the basis of my criticism of copyright.
> ...if you don't like the terms of the contract, don't sign it...
Right. If you don't want those to whom you sell copies of your work to
make additional copies induce them to sign a contract in
Celejar writes:
> Agreed, but I'm not sure how this effects our disagreement about the
> legitimacy of the (current) intellectual regime. If they feel the
> value is less than the amount charged by the creators to recoup their
> costs, they're free not to purchase the works.
They don't purchase th
On Fri, 3 Aug 2012 00:59:08 +0300
Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Mi, 01 aug 12, 20:23:35, Celejar wrote:
> > On Wed, 1 Aug 2012 19:45:27 +0300
> > Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> >
> > > On Mi, 01 aug 12, 00:59:29, Yaro Kasear wrote:
> > > > On 07/31/2012 01:42 PM, Celejar wrote:
> > > > >On Fri, 20 Jul 20
On Thu, 2 Aug 2012 20:45:56 -0400
Brad Alexander wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 5:55 PM, Andrei POPESCU
> wrote:
> > On Jo, 02 aug 12, 09:41:59, Celejar wrote:
> >>
> >> Well, we'll have to agree to disagree here, as we're just disagreeing
> >> over irreducible first principles. I, and the law
On Fri, 3 Aug 2012 00:55:14 +0300
Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Jo, 02 aug 12, 09:41:59, Celejar wrote:
> >
> > Well, we'll have to agree to disagree here, as we're just disagreeing
> > over irreducible first principles. I, and the law, think that it is
> > reasonable and fair that the creator of c
On 03/08/12 02:09, Celejar wrote:
On Thu, 02 Aug 2012 18:17:56 -0500
John Hasler wrote:
Celejar writes:
This is dogma.
It's just advice to someone who seems to think that owning copyrights
makes the publishers his "masters".
Fair enough.
There is a great deal of software, and certainly
On Thu, 02 Aug 2012 18:17:56 -0500
John Hasler wrote:
> Celejar writes:
> > This is dogma.
>
> It's just advice to someone who seems to think that owning copyrights
> makes the publishers his "masters".
Fair enough.
> > There is a great deal of software, and certainly other cultural
> > materi
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 5:55 PM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Jo, 02 aug 12, 09:41:59, Celejar wrote:
>>
>> Well, we'll have to agree to disagree here, as we're just disagreeing
>> over irreducible first principles. I, and the law, think that it is
>> reasonable and fair that the creator of certain t
On Aug 2, 2012, at 5:17 PM, John Hasler wrote:
> It's just advice to someone who seems to think that owning copyrights
> makes the publishers his "masters".
I'm sorry. I shouldn't have used that word. I wasn't thinking that
Disney is my master. I was thinking of lawyers and politicians --
the
On 08/02/2012 11:00 AM, Brad Alexander wrote:
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 9:41 AM, Celejar wrote:
On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 19:50:37 -0500
John Hasler wrote:
Celejar writes:
...so just because the marginal cost of duplication is zero, why is is
unreasonable for it to charge per copy?
It is entirely r
Celejar writes:
> This is dogma.
It's just advice to someone who seems to think that owning copyrights
makes the publishers his "masters".
> There is a great deal of software, and certainly other cultural
> material (books, movies, music) out there which has no FLOSS
> equivalent, and I don't hav
On Thu, 02 Aug 2012 14:25:22 -0500
John Hasler wrote:
...
> They are not your masters. You don't need their stuff. Make your own
> or get it from people who share your values.
This is dogma. There is a great deal of software, and certainly other
cultural material (books, movies, music) out th
On Mi, 01 aug 12, 20:23:35, Celejar wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Aug 2012 19:45:27 +0300
> Andrei POPESCU wrote:
>
> > On Mi, 01 aug 12, 00:59:29, Yaro Kasear wrote:
> > > On 07/31/2012 01:42 PM, Celejar wrote:
> > > >On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 10:30:50 +0300
> > > >Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> > > >
> > > >>On Jo, 1
On Jo, 02 aug 12, 09:41:59, Celejar wrote:
>
> Well, we'll have to agree to disagree here, as we're just disagreeing
> over irreducible first principles. I, and the law, think that it is
> reasonable and fair that the creator of certain types of intellectual /
> cultural artifacts should be entitl
Glenn writes:
> If I buy an audio cassette of something, I've paid for the content.
No. You've paid for the audio cassette.
> It seems reasonable to me that I have the right to make a copy of what
> I bought with machinery I own.
I agree. The law does not. Making copies of the "work" [1] is t
On Aug 2, 2012, at 9:00 AM, Brad Alexander wrote:
> The thing I don't understand is that the content producers bang on
> about "intellectual property" which, if I am understanding correctly
> (and I believe I am) is the *content*. The music or movie or whatever.
I claim there's a lot more to it
Ahoj,
Dňa Thu, 2 Aug 2012 11:00:26 -0400 Brad Alexander
napísal:
> On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 9:41 AM, Celejar wrote:
> > On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 19:50:37 -0500
> > John Hasler wrote:
> >
> >> Celejar writes:
> >> > ...so just because the marginal cost of duplication is zero, why is
> >> > is unreason
Brad Alexander writes:
> The thing I don't understand is that the content producers bang on
> about "intellectual property" which, if I am understanding correctly
> (and I believe I am) is the *content*.
"Intellectual property" is a right established by statute. In the case
of copyright it is the
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 9:41 AM, Celejar wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 19:50:37 -0500
> John Hasler wrote:
>
>> Celejar writes:
>> > ...so just because the marginal cost of duplication is zero, why is is
>> > unreasonable for it to charge per copy?
>>
>> It is entirely reasonable for them to charge
On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 19:50:37 -0500
John Hasler wrote:
> Celejar writes:
> > ...so just because the marginal cost of duplication is zero, why is is
> > unreasonable for it to charge per copy?
>
> It is entirely reasonable for them to charge whatever they see fit for
> copies they make, but why sh
On 08/01/2012 08:50 PM, John Hasler wrote:
Celejar writes:
...so just because the marginal cost of duplication is zero, why is is
unreasonable for it to charge per copy?
It is entirely reasonable for them to charge whatever they see fit for
copies they make, but why should your "producers" be a
Celejar writes:
> ...so just because the marginal cost of duplication is zero, why is is
> unreasonable for it to charge per copy?
It is entirely reasonable for them to charge whatever they see fit for
copies they make, but why should your "producers" be able to charge for
copies other people make
On Wed, 1 Aug 2012 19:45:27 +0300
Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Mi, 01 aug 12, 00:59:29, Yaro Kasear wrote:
> > On 07/31/2012 01:42 PM, Celejar wrote:
> > >On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 10:30:50 +0300
> > >Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> > >
> > >>On Jo, 19 iul 12, 22:50:25, Celejar wrote:
> > >>>Quite true - and co
On Mi, 01 aug 12, 00:59:29, Yaro Kasear wrote:
> On 07/31/2012 01:42 PM, Celejar wrote:
> >On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 10:30:50 +0300
> >Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> >
> >>On Jo, 19 iul 12, 22:50:25, Celejar wrote:
> >>>Quite true - and completely irrelevant to my point. I don't deny that
> >>>money can be mad
On 07/31/2012 01:42 PM, Celejar wrote:
On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 10:30:50 +0300
Andrei POPESCU wrote:
On Jo, 19 iul 12, 22:50:25, Celejar wrote:
Quite true - and completely irrelevant to my point. I don't deny that
money can be made with FLOSS, just that it's pointless to try to sell
copies of one'
On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 12:16:58 +0300
Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Vi, 20 iul 12, 04:29:05, Gary Dale wrote:
> > On 20/07/12 03:30 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> > >On Jo, 19 iul 12, 22:50:25, Celejar wrote:
> > >>Quite true - and completely irrelevant to my point. I don't deny that
> > >>money can be ma
On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 04:29:05 -0400
Gary Dale wrote:
...
> As for Celejar's point about selling licenses - he's wants to make money
> only from direct sales. That's his problem. In every business you have
> to look for ways to make money. Direct sales is just one method and its
> a method that
On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 10:30:50 +0300
Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Jo, 19 iul 12, 22:50:25, Celejar wrote:
> >
> > Quite true - and completely irrelevant to my point. I don't deny that
> > money can be made with FLOSS, just that it's pointless to try to sell
> > copies of one's software if it's freel
On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 17:39:12 +0200
gaffa wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 23:45:34 -0400
> Celejar wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 23:30:57 -0400
> > Gary Dale wrote:
> >
> > ...
> >
> > > Personally I think one of the biggest appeals of Debian (and of
> > > Linux in general) is the commitment
On Thursday 19 July 2012 04:45:34 Celejar wrote:
> > Debian users need to understand that attempts to encumber knowledge for
> > profit are inherently wrong.
>
> I don't wholly agree here. I have a very strong preference for FLOSS,
> for many reasons, but I fully respect the rights of others to dev
On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 17:26:37 +1200
Chris Bannister wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 03:20:03PM -0400, Celejar wrote:
> > On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 09:08:58 +0300
> > Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> >
> > > On Jo, 19 iul 12, 01:17:49, Doug wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Sorry for the bandwidth, but I think the Linux
On Vi, 20 iul 12, 04:29:05, Gary Dale wrote:
> On 20/07/12 03:30 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> >On Jo, 19 iul 12, 22:50:25, Celejar wrote:
> >>Quite true - and completely irrelevant to my point. I don't deny that
> >>money can be made with FLOSS, just that it's pointless to try to sell
> >>copies of
On 20/07/12 03:30 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
On Jo, 19 iul 12, 22:50:25, Celejar wrote:
Quite true - and completely irrelevant to my point. I don't deny that
money can be made with FLOSS, just that it's pointless to try to sell
copies of one's software if it's freely copyable. The examples you gi
On Jo, 19 iul 12, 22:50:25, Celejar wrote:
>
> Quite true - and completely irrelevant to my point. I don't deny that
> money can be made with FLOSS, just that it's pointless to try to sell
> copies of one's software if it's freely copyable. The examples you give
> are all of models other than the
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 03:20:03PM -0400, Celejar wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 09:08:58 +0300
> Andrei POPESCU wrote:
>
> > On Jo, 19 iul 12, 01:17:49, Doug wrote:
> > >
> > > Sorry for the bandwidth, but I think the Linux user--I'm certainly
> > > one of them--needs to realize what real special
On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 16:04:10 -0400
Gary Dale wrote:
> On 19/07/12 03:20 PM, Celejar wrote:
> > On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 09:08:58 +0300
> > Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> >
> >> On Jo, 19 iul 12, 01:17:49, Doug wrote:
> >>> Sorry for the bandwidth, but I think the Linux user--I'm certainly
> >>> one of them-
On 19/07/12 03:20 PM, Celejar wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 09:08:58 +0300
Andrei POPESCU wrote:
On Jo, 19 iul 12, 01:17:49, Doug wrote:
Sorry for the bandwidth, but I think the Linux user--I'm certainly
one of them--needs to realize what real specialized software is, and
what it costs to develo
On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 08:28:46 +0200
Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 09:08 +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> > Also, I don't have a problem with paying for specialized software
> > [snip] as long as they run natively on my platform of choice.
>
> +1 and plus, nobody should have compunctio
On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 09:08:58 +0300
Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Jo, 19 iul 12, 01:17:49, Doug wrote:
> >
> > Sorry for the bandwidth, but I think the Linux user--I'm certainly
> > one of them--needs to realize what real specialized software is, and
> > what it costs to develop, and why it's not fr
On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 01:17:49 -0400
Doug wrote:
> On 07/18/2012 11:45 PM, Celejar wrote:
> > On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 23:30:57 -0400
> > Gary Dale wrote:
> >
> > ...
> >
> >> Personally I think one of the biggest appeals of Debian (and of Linux in
> >> general) is the commitment to freedom. IP laws an
On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 23:45:34 -0400
Celejar wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 23:30:57 -0400
> Gary Dale wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > Personally I think one of the biggest appeals of Debian (and of
> > Linux in general) is the commitment to freedom. IP laws and the
> > degree to which hardware vendors suppo
On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 09:38 -0400, Gary Dale wrote:
> Do two wrongs make a right?
No, I'm just kidding.
> I've got computer files dating back to 1990 on my server. A lot of it is
> in proprietary formats that there haven't been programs for in over a
> decade. These are my files that I am effec
On 19/07/12 02:28 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 09:08 +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
Also, I don't have a problem with paying for specialized software
[snip] as long as they run natively on my platform of choice.
+1 and plus, nobody should have compunction when illegal using some
On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 09:08 +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> Also, I don't have a problem with paying for specialized software
> [snip] as long as they run natively on my platform of choice.
+1 and plus, nobody should have compunction when illegal using some
software. I've got the privilege not to n
On Jo, 19 iul 12, 01:17:49, Doug wrote:
>
> Sorry for the bandwidth, but I think the Linux user--I'm certainly
> one of them--needs to realize what real specialized software is, and
> what it costs to develop, and why it's not free.
Please don't confuse free (beer) with free(dom). Also, I don't h
On 07/18/2012 11:45 PM, Celejar wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 23:30:57 -0400
Gary Dale wrote:
...
Personally I think one of the biggest appeals of Debian (and of Linux in
general) is the commitment to freedom. IP laws and the degree to which
hardware vendors support freedom is relevant to purcha
On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 23:30:57 -0400
Gary Dale wrote:
...
> Personally I think one of the biggest appeals of Debian (and of Linux in
> general) is the commitment to freedom. IP laws and the degree to which
> hardware vendors support freedom is relevant to purchasing decisions.
I agree.
> Debi
On 18/07/12 05:32 PM, Rick Thomas wrote:
Hi folks,
While fascinating, this discussion has wandered seriously Off Topic. It's no longer
appropriate for "debian-user", I think. I'm not a list-guru. Is there a
debian list where it would be on-topic? If so, maybe we should take it there.
Enjoy
Hi folks,
While fascinating, this discussion has wandered seriously Off Topic. It's no
longer appropriate for "debian-user", I think. I'm not a list-guru. Is there
a debian list where it would be on-topic? If so, maybe we should take it there.
Enjoy!
Rick
On Jul 18, 2012, at 6:46 AM, Gary
72 matches
Mail list logo
