Subject: Re: open source definition
From: Brian Bartholomew <bb@wv.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 00:01:14 -0400

> Not many people call for a boycott of charging for records

After much complaint, there were US laws passed to legalize taping TV
shows for replay at home.  I think there was a similar law to allow
taping songs off the radio for home replay.  There is usually a loud
protest objecting to copy protection mechanisms when a new audio or
video recording media is introduced.  Endemic casual illegal copying
could be considered a personal boycott.

> few people think of themselves as being in the "Vinyl record
> business" or the "free music business"

That's a habit encouraged by the middlemen in the music business, not
a description of fundamentals.  The IP laws are a set of arbitrary
policies by humans.  We can rebalance them to embrace the lowered cost
of bitwise duplication and distribution if we so choose.

> I don't see why software is inherently different...

It isn't.  But as a consumer, if I can figure out a way to buy music
with more rights delivered to me, fewer middlemen, lower costs, and a
lower markup, I'm interested.


A member of the League for Programming Freedom (LPF) ftp://ftp.gnu.org/pub/lpf
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian Bartholomew - bb@wv.com - www.wv.com - Working Version, Cambridge, MA