🚀 go-pugleaf

Kurt Weber <kurt@rowsw.com> wrote in message news:snmruim7jjt116@corp.supernews.com...
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>> Kurt Weber <kurt@rowsw.com> wrote
>>> Ian Staples <ianst@refer.to.sig.au.invalid> wrote

>>>> Seen in a continuing thread on the morality
>>>> and legality of stealing from Microsoft:

>>>> Kurt Weber <kurt@rowsw.com> wrote
>>>>> Saltini Roberto <superobby@tiscalinet.it> wrote

>>>>>> Where can I downlaod QuickBasic?

>>>>> You can't (legally).  While the concepts of "intellectual
>>>>> property" and copyrights are morally wrong, you are
>>>>> still obligated by law to respect them.

>>>> Why are they "morally wrong"?

>>>> Why can you have "ownership" of something you've made
>>>> with your hands but not something you've made with your head?

>>> Because this is information,

>> It aint. Its a creation of a mind, instead of hands.

>>> and people should not have to pay to gain access to information.

>> It aint 'information', that is not protected by copyright.

> A computer program (more specifically, the
> source code to the program) is information.

Wrong. Its the creation of someone's mind,
or more than one individual's most of the time.

No different to a physical creation done by someone's hands.

Just as true of say a novel.

Information is something else entirely and
isnt copyrighted and cant be copyrighted.