Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 20:55:10 +0000 From: Anatoly Vorobey <mellon@pobox.com> To: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> Cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Why are people against GNU? WAS Re: 5.0 already? Message-ID: <20000524205510.A20671@happy.checkpoint.com> In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20000521125607.041b0100@localhost>; from brett@lariat.org on Sun, May 21, 2000 at 01:00:51PM -0600 References: <20000514023000.A16663@happy.checkpoint.com> <3.0.6.32.20000513192827.00895a10@mail85.pair.com> <20000514040731.B17455@happy.checkpoint.com> <391E27DD.320D4BBF@mail.ptd.net> <20000514024308.A57423@sasami.jurai.net> <392475F3.513EE781@mail.ptd.net> <20000520185544.A47143@happy.checkpoint.com> <39270B29.D09AA59D@mail.ptd.net> <20000521160901.A215@happy.checkpoint.com> <4.3.1.2.20000521125607.041b0100@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, May 21, 2000 at 01:00:51PM -0600, Brett Glass wrote: > >properties are concerned, the difference between a chess game and > >a music composition is perhaps of a degree but not of a kind. The > >statute clearly gives preferential treatment to kinds of intellectual > >activity the society feels to be especially worth encouraging. > > The entire purpose of copyrights and patents is to encourage intellectual > activity. And they work for that purpose. Exactly. So if someone (like Stallman) claims that abolishing copyright would encourage intellectual activity better than retaining them (which is the reason why he would've liked to see it abolished), referring to his views as "evil" is obviously misguided. Wrong -- yes. > A chess game is an interesting case in some would say that the game > was an improvisational performance, sort of like an improvisational > dance. On the other hand, the moves in a chess game are also functional, > and copyright specifically does NOT cover items that are functional. Like code, right? Or are you trying to say that computer source code isn't functional? > creative part cannot be copied.) Moves in a chess game ARE functional > (the function being to beat the opponent), and some are even provably > optimal. So, they might not be protected. Well, source code IS functional, and some of it is certainly provably optimal. So, it might not be protected. -- Anatoly Vorobey, mellon@pobox.com http://pobox.com/~mellon/ "Angels can fly because they take themselves lightly" - G.K.Chesterton To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000524205510.A20671>