[Chugalug] Richard Stallman and open source

DaWorm daworm at gmail.com
Sat Dec 15 15:55:11 UTC 2012


There is no way RMS affects us TODAY.  But if he gets his way, THEN we
would all be affected.
On Dec 14, 2012 8:59 PM, "rdflowers" <base at chalice.us> wrote:

> Stephen,
>
> There is no way that RMS affects you, UNLESS this code of yours isn't
> fully yours but you would like to incorporate someone else's code in your
> own without fulfilling their license terms.
>
> You wouldn't do that, would you?
>
> I still don't see what some find to be unclear -- maybe just because it
> just isn't convenient to them that things are as they are?
>
>
>
>
> ----- Message from daworm at gmail.com ---------
>     Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2012 20:13:30 -0500
>     From: DaWorm <daworm at gmail.com>
> Reply-To: Chattanooga Unix Gnu Android Linux Users Group <
> chugalug at chugalug.org>
>  Subject: Re: [Chugalug] Richard Stallman and open source
>       To: Chattanooga Unix Gnu Android Linux Users Group <
> chugalug at chugalug.org>
>
>
>  On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 7:17 PM, Stephen Kraus <ub3ratl4sf00 at gmail.com
>> >wrote:
>>
>>  I don't think making money off your code will ever be an issue, companies
>>> hire you to program, what code you use to do it is less of there concern
>>> beyond maybe which language you use.
>>>
>>>
>> I write embedded systems code.  I control hardware via software, and the
>> hardware is trivial to copy.  While my company might continue to sell that
>> hardware even if my software were to be free to the world, for a little
>> while, it wouldn't be long before someone else would copy the whole lot
>> and
>> go into competition with us.  RMS thinks that's a grand idea.  When some
>> Chinese knockoff made by nearly slave labor undercuts our prices by 50%
>> though, it won't be long before I'm out of a job.  They spent a couple of
>> days copying the PCB, an hour or so figuring out how to compile my code,
>> and !bam! they're in business.  So the months, and sometimes years it has
>> taken me to develop a product is now copied in a matter of days.  I'm
>> sorry, that's not the kind of world that rewards innovation.
>>
>> We all know its a fools errand to ask programmers to work for free, but
>>
>>> Stallman has a point: Companies shouldn't be allowed to copyright
>>> individual bits of codes, a whole program? Sure, but copyrighting
>>> individual lines and statements is like copyrighting the English language
>>> sentence by sentence.
>>>
>>>
>> If I come up with a sort routine that is a thousand times faster than any
>> other out there, I (or my employer) darn well better be able to copyright
>> that, and not just the whole program that makes use of it.  However, it
>> usually isn't copyright that provides that protection, it is patents.  And
>> software patents are a whole 'nother kettle of fish.  I would agree that
>> all the bullshit about copyrighting "look and feel" needs to go.  But
>> truly
>> novel algorithms and methodologies deserve some form of protection.  The
>> problem lately is the definition of "novel" has gotten pretty sloppy.
>>
>> Jeff.
>>
>>
>
> ----- End message from daworm at gmail.com -----
>
>
>
> --
> R. D. Flowers, Chattanooga, TN, USA
> http://chalice.us/poe/
>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> Chugalug mailing list
> Chugalug at chugalug.org
> http://chugalug.org/cgi-bin/**mailman/listinfo/chugalug<http://chugalug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chugalug>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://chugalug.org/pipermail/chugalug/attachments/20121215/7401d49c/attachment.html>


More information about the Chugalug mailing list