Linux World domination (was Re: [NCLUG] PC for Linux (Ubuntu))

[John L. Bass]

Chad Perrin wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 06:02:58PM -0600, John L. Bass wrote:
>   
>>>  
>>>       
>> Open source software is supposed to about offering freedom of choice.
>> Free software taking away the freedom of consumer to purchase their
>> proprietary program they would choose, is about removing choice.
>>     
>
> Err . . . is there some specific type of software that you imagine people
> can only create as proprietary software?  I fail to see where open source
> software would in any way eliminate choices in software.
>   

The context is FOSS advocates that are against proprietary software, or 
support the RMS manifesto, or deny the rights behind copyrights that 
secure profits from software authorship. This manifests itself in the 
lack of choice that Linux desktop users have when products are not 
ported to Linux, because a vocal group in the FOSS community are very 
hostile to shrink wrap binary applications on Linux. This is bad, 
because while Linux offers choice, it at the same time prevents choice, 
and further ensures the Microsoft de facto monopoly.

So, without that context, the statement appears a bit broad, and should 
be restated to include the above.


>
>   
>> A programmer is an author, and should have the rights of any other
>> author ... removing the rights of software authors, is just the first
>> step of removing the rights from all authors, artists, and other
>> creative people to remove their right of ownership, and right to make
>> a living from their own creativity.
>>     
>
> Whether copyright is a "natural" (read: ethical) right is a matter that
> is open to debate.  Perhaps you should justify your support for copyright
> before using it as a bludgeon
The context is legal right to secure and enforce US copyright laws. I 
very clearly stated otherwise in other posts. Any discussion toward 
"natural" or "ethical" rights, is a different topic.