[d@DCC] Response to Globe Article on unauthorized downloading
russell at flora.ca
Thu Aug 11 14:49:49 EDT 2005
Wallace J.McLean wrote:
> "Someone else" -- nature -- already has done this. It is physically
> impossible, in this universe, to physically control every act
> of "sharing".
The same is true of every other man-made law, so I don't see your
point. You never need to have a man-made law for something that is
built into nature. In fact we make man-made laws specifically to
suggest social things which are different than our nature (deter murder,
etc) to fulfill some larger public policy purpose.
> The Copyright Act cannot possible cover off every possibility for how
> and when something is "shared", and nor should it. Our laws must,
> implicitly and where necessarily expressly, admit of an ambient degree
> of "sharing".
This is beside the point. You took one sentence in a letter to the
editor and tried to interpret it as if it was an encyclopedia that
provided an impossible level of detail.
We can all do the reverse and believe from your one word (why?) that
you are anti-creator, anti-innovator and believe that governments should
abrogate article 27(2) of the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights.
I believe there is considerable room to debate the meaning of article
27 (the entirety, not the second half that some extremists focus on),
but think it is a different situation to ignore it.
> What would you refrain from creating?
Impossible to say, given without copyright I doubt we would have this
software to be having this conversation via ;-)
Without licenses and copyright there would be no way to impose a tie
of the source code to the distribution of binary software, meaning that
copyright protects the type of software I work with. If all software
was in the public domain, then we would have some that is FLOSS (that
which came with source code) and some that was not (that which did not
come with source code) and no lever to try to encourage more software to
be distributed with source code.
If I didn't have a way to leverage my own software to encourage
others to release their software as FLOSS (copyleft), then there is a
fair bit of software that I never would have written as adequate
motivation to do so would not have existed. While I get paid for much
of the software that I write, I don't always get paid enough for the
money to be enough motivation.
Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <http://www.flora.ca/>
2066+ Canadians oppose Bill C-60 which protects antiquated Recording,
Motion Picture and "software manufacturing" industries from change...
http://KillBillC60.ca Sign--> http://digital-copyright.ca/petition/
More information about the Discuss