discuss: getting sponsorship and marketing LDP
Subject:
Re: getting sponsorship and marketing LDP
From:
"s. keeling" ####@####.####
Date:
17 Dec 2003 18:02:06 -0000
Message-Id: <20031217175944.GA21615@infidel.spots.ab.ca>
Incoming from Jon Fox:
> [snip]
> same right, and so on). If that freedom is not granted us by the
> author, we have the right to choose other software. Stallman goes on to
> argue that not exercising that right restricts our freedom.
Keep that in mind in the following. It's a value judgement.
> To extend your analogy of wrenches, desks and chairs, I think you'd
> agree that you, customer A, have the right to alter the chair that you
> bought from company B, and to sell it to customer C. Company B has the
That depends on the agreement you made with the manufacturer.
> right to refuse to service that chair after you've altered or resold it,
> but not to stop you from doing it. Software goes a step further than
Not necessarily.
Anytime I've seen these arguments equating tangibles to software,
there's lossage. Whoever built that chair spent time and money on
facilities and infrastructure, sourcing materials and suppliers, etc.
Much of their ability to sell it to you at a reasonable cost to you
depends on this backgrounded materials costing.
It's also generally a given that you get a "thing" whose workings are
plainly evident to anyone looking at it. Software, on the other hand,
relies on algorithms and data structures, much of which is difficult
to replicate even if you have the code. It is physically easier to
sell obfuscated workings of software than it is of chairs. I think
that's important. It makes software fundamentally different from
chairs. When developing software, you can hide its workings, just as
a chair manufacturer can "hide" his backgrounded startup work from
potential competitors.
I'm not saying this invalidates the argument. I'm generally in
agreement with it. I just wish I could stop seeing "chair =~
software" arguments. The two are wildly different.
What's important is the agreement you made with the manufacturer. If
he wants to sell you a chair, that's one thing. If he wants to sell
you a licence to use one of his chairs (along with his restrictions on
use), that's another. Going into the deal, both parties know what
they're getting and have every opportunity to back out and go
somewhere else for a deal that's more to their liking.
--
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
(*) http://www.spots.ab.ca/~keeling
- -
