[Chugalug] Richard Stallman and open source
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:
> 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
>> 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
>> 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
>> novel algorithms and methodologies deserve some form of protection. The
>> problem lately is the definition of "novel" has gotten pretty sloppy.
> ----- End message from daworm at gmail.com -----
> R. D. Flowers, Chattanooga, TN, USA
> Chugalug mailing list
> Chugalug at chugalug.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Chugalug