Re: GNU Public Licences Revisited (again)

Chris Sonnack wrote:
> Rob Thorpe writes:
>
> > Just to be clear, so I don't get shot or my bank account hacked ;) ...
> >
> > If your software is available only as binary, or comes with license
> > agreements preventing distribution then I won't buy it or accept it
> > anyway. I have not intention to accept agreements and then break them.
>
> Fair enough. I 100% in favor of letting the "market" determine what
> is successful and what is not. (Someone used to have a sig about how
> ideas should all need to fight for themselves in the marketplace...
> closest I could find is the Paul Sarbanes quote,
>
> "You have to make your voice heard, argue your point of
> view, make sure that your arguments are well informed,
> listen to those who disagree with you, giving careful
> consideration to opposing views and be willing to see
> your views tested in what we call 'the free marketplace
> of ideas'.
>
> Which is along the same lines, but Not The One.)

Yes, exactly. In time we'll see what people think to the various
approaches by what is done. Hopefully society will chose the best one.

> Now, question..... does this position of yours limit your purchases
> of CD players, DVD players, microwave ovens, cars and other devices
> with *embedded* proprietry binary software? All that stuff is hands
> off and not for resale or distribution (I would imagine).

Good point. I do buy CD players and microwave ovens like everyone
else.

In some ways though the software in these things is different to
consumer software, you don't agree to a license agreement when you buy
a microwave for example. It wouldn't matter to me if the binary in my
microwave was copyrighted or not, I wouldn't take my microwave apart to
extract it. Even if I did it wouldn't be much use to me. It probably
wouldn't be of use anybody else, but that's not certain in every case.

This isn't consistent I agree. I'll have to think about the subject
more.

.