🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <kp79nuINNsit@early-bird.think.com> barmar@think.com (Barry Margolin) writes:
>I don't know the FSF's official policy, or RMS's personal opinion, but
>here's mine.  The difference between computer programs and music/video is
>that part of computer programs' utility is their malleability.  Users can
>build new programs out of old programs, in order to enhance them and fix
>bugs.  The main reason for the GPL is to preserve hackers' rights to tweak

But I do that with digitized music a lot.  I take it, manipulate it,
change it, use it in other things, filter out mistakes....  And when
I can afford the equipment I intend to do the same with video.  I don't
think that line is there.  Software and music are very similar.  They
both have styles, they have a set of instructions, there are compilers
and interpreters, there is an artistic component which results in 
different people's "performances" being different using the same
initial requirements.  I really don't see a big enough difference
to justify an entire change in copyright philosophy.
-- 
Alfalfa Software, Inc.          |       Poste:  The EMail for Unix
nazgul@alfalfa.com              |       Send Anything... Anywhere
617/497-2922                    |       info@alfalfa.com

I'm not sure which upsets me more: that people are so unwilling to accept
responsibility for their own actions, or that they are so eager to regulate
everyone else's.