🚀 go-pugleaf

Anders Wegge Jakobsen <wegge@wegge.dk> wrote:
>  On Sun, 04 Oct 1998 12:55:57 GMT, norman@arcady.u-net.com (NF Stevens) said:

> NS> Anders Wegge Jakobsen <wegge@wegge.dk> wrote:
>>> On Sun, 04 Oct 1998 01:36:47 GMT, norman@arcady.u-net.com (NF
>>> Stevens) said:
>>> 
> NS> Anders Wegge Jakobsen <wegge@wegge.dk> wrote: [snip]
>>>
>>>>> As I said, when I buy an intrangible asset, the entity I buy it
>>>>> from is no more able to restrict my freedom of possesion, than it
>>>>> is when it's a tangible asset. *Except* for software.
>>>
> NS> and poetry, and music, and art, and literature. In fact everything
> NS> covered by copyright.

>>>  When was the last time you bought a book, and had to agree that
>>> you wouldn't scribble notes in it's margin?

> NS> When was the last time you bought a piece of software, and had to
> NS> agree that you wouldn't write your name on the disk?

>  The Microsoft EULA states (illegally) that the user is forbidden to
> modify the software in any way. 

Maybe it is not illegal in the part of the world where Microsoft
has their HQ, the USA. There copyright law can be very different
from other parts of the world.

(as the only geographic specific group this thread is being
posted to is uk.comp.os.linux maybe people should only apply
UK copyright law to the discussion...)

>>>  The only implication of copyright, is that I cannot buy a
>>> copyrighted work, and then claim I created it myself. Any other
>>> restriction is standing on very soft grond, legally speaking.

> NS> Rubbish. If you photo-copy more than a small amount of a
> NS> copyrighted text you will be in breach of the copyright laws. If

>  I gather that you heven't got the concept of "personal use" where you
> come from. That's a shame. 

Maybe they lack "review and critique" too.

> NS> you copy a cassette tape you will be in breach of the copyright

>  No I wont.

> NS> laws. If you publish a book which contains copyrighted material
> NS> for which you do not have the copyright holders permission you
> NS> will be in breach of the copyright laws. Basically for any

>  No I wont.

> NS> copyrighted material the author has the right to control its

>  Basicly what is available is the right to be recognized as
> author. What goes beyond that is caused by threats.

> NS> copying and distribution. Software is no different.

>  Software has been treated like a sacred cow since the
> mid-seventies. I don't like it, but the fact is that the software

The question surely should be "what is the best way to treat
software".

> companies have succeeded in their quest for domination where others
> have rightfully failed.

It is unusal for other copywrightable material; music, literature,
art, etc. to be "owned" by large (and impersonal) companies.