Re: Source Code for OS?

["Frank Townsend" <ftownsen@iamdigex.net>]

<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...