"Ideally, you create a paywall for your game where they must pay for their
copy of it. But then realistically, once that tarball and source code is out
there after the first person buys it, it is distributed freely without
restriction according to the free software license. It reminds me of that
saying where you are the first one to get cable on your street, but the last
one to pay for it."
Paying for copies made sense when copying was hard, but it isn't anymore.
This goes back to finding other funding models. Just because someone is
unimaginative and can't think of how to raise enough to fund what they want
to do doesn't justify making stuff proprietary.
"Art is not software and doesn't have to follow the freedoms associated with
free software. Therefore doesn't conflict with the free software ideology.
Maybe for you, with the free culture mentality, but that isn't software. I do
agree that there should be no restrictions in learning or access to museums,
but a game is a source of entertainment and not education."
They can be education but I digress. You're clearly not onboard with free
culture. That doesn't mean others aren't and won't be pushing for it. Nor
does not mean they're being "closed minded" and "not realistic."
