[kooler] Re: Cd Burning Question
darrel at coma.ucsd.edu
Fri Jul 6 12:05:33 PDT 2001
Alright, let me word this carefully, so as not to start another war.
I thought my comment was fairly innocuous, but now we're treading on thin ice.
To sum up, no. The point of Free Software is not that authors are free to
release SW under whatever license they want. Authors have always been able
to do that. From my perspective, the "point" of Free Software is to entice
and encourage authors to keep their software free (as in speech). The "bait"
is the GPL'd code. By incorporating said bait, the author waives the right
to release the code under whatever license they want, and agrees to keep the
new, modified, software free.
The public is not allowed to determine whether software is Free or not based
on their beliefs, but they are allowed some latitude in "law and honor" to
decide what "Fair Use" is. My point was that since Operating Systems and the
lower levels of applications are a means to an end, rather than an end in
itself, it is easier to apply a "Fair Use" rationalization for copying them.
On the other hand, since the game is an end in itself, and since the primary
market for the game is *you*, the home consumer, I don't believe the fair use
doctrine maps as well to these games.
So maybe you did misread me, and maybe you didn't. I think I should have
said, "As much as I believe in fair use, I don't think you can apply it as
liberally to bleeding-edge games as you can to other pieces of software."
"I don't believe the Free Software model works well with games."
On Friday 06 July 2001 11:36, you wrote:
> Darrel Lawrence wrote:
> > As much as I believe in free software, i don't think
> > it applies to bleeding-edge games.
> Huh? What does Free Software to do with this? Isn't the point that authors
> are free to release SW under whatever license they want, and the public is
> bound by law and honor not to violate those licenses?
> Something about what you said made me think you believe that people should
> be allowed to determine whether software is Free or not based on their
> beliefs, and to hell with what the author specified. Not so. But probably I
> misread you.
> This is perilously close to Kooler.
More information about the KPLUG-List