Re: Source Code for OS?

[olcott <olcott@qwest.net>]

His was an imprecise and thus irrelevant analogy...

Frank Townsend wrote:

> <sigh>
>
> Olcott:
>
> Permit me to point out that I think you misunderstand Quantum Cat's analogy.
>
> QC compares ownership of a magazine collection with intellectual property
> ownership:  the thieves who steal the magazines justify their theft by
> saying that the items have no value, just as those who pirate old Apple II
> software may justify their activity by saying (inter alia) that the software
> is valueless.
>
> To make sense of the analogy as stated, you have to take a few steps up the
> abstraction ladder.  View the concept of "property" as a "bundle of rights."
> In QC's analogy, the thieves interfere with your exclusive rights of
> possession, use and enjoyment of the magazines, just as software "pirates"
> interfere with the exclusive right of a copyright holder to make copies of
> an original work.  QC then points out how hollow the assertions of
> valuelessness as a defense sound in the context of theft of a tangible item.
>
> Thus, your revised analogy is off point, since you (in your revised
> scenario), in effect, are no longer in the position of a victim of a
> trespass on your rights with respect to ownership of the magazines.  The
> miscreant who copies your collection really infringes on the rights of the
> magazines' copyright holder, not on your rights as rightful owner of the
> copies (discounting the burglary or breaking and entering that must have
> occurred to gain access to the items).
>
> Remember (with apologies for the repetitiousness) when QC refers to "theft,"
> s/he refers to theft (i.e. infringement) of the copyright holder's exclusive
> right to make copies of a copyrighted work.
>
> "olcott" <olcott@qwest.net> wrote in message
> 3A8394B9.876A9F1F@qwest.net">news:3A8394B9.876A9F1F@qwest.net...
> >
> >
> > Quantum_Cat wrote:
> >
> > > If I may use an analogy:
> > >
> > > You store your stuff in the garage.  One day you notice lots of people
> in your
> > > garage going through your stuff.  You confront them and one particularly
> bold one
> > > debates you.  As the others cart off your careworn Playboy collection,
> he
> > > declares that this isn't theft because that old stuff doesn't have any
> value, and
> > > is going to waste simply being stored in your garage.
> >
> > Not analogous... If the "thief" made digital copies
> > of your digital playboy's while you retained the
> > originals, and these digital copies were stored
> > on your web site, where this "thief" could not
> > possibly damage these originals, then I would
> > not care... Your error in your attempt to use
> > reasoning to refute me is that you are not
> > nearly sufficiently precise in your statements...
> >
> > Try another analogy, and make sure that
> > it is analogous on every relevent dimension
> > this time...