Re: [OT] Right to use vs. sue

[Dmitry A. Kazakov <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>]

On Tue, 4 May 2004 10:53:03 +0100, "Marius Amado Alves"
<amado.alves@netcabo.pt> wrote:

>> >...We're discussing Kasakov's proposal that the legal system
>> >should make no warranty licenses, e.g. GPL, void,
>>
>> GPL will not be void, because GPLed products are not sold.
>
>This under your proposed system, right?

Yes. I think all are agree on how important FSF is.

>Because under the current system
>selling is not required for a license to hold.
>
>> Precisely I meant that IF you sell a software product, then either 1)
>> you have to give something in return [in addition to the "right to
>> use"], or 2) the product automatically falls under some sort of
>> "default" license which grants rights to use, copy, modify, reverse
>> engineer it to everybody.
>>
>> N.B. A software house is free to choose (2) and protect the product
>> using activation keys etc. But then, anybody would have right to crack
>> that protection.
>
>Again, just to make sure, you're describing your proposed system, right?

Yes, an imaginary system, though ACT seems successfully working within
something similar to that.

>Then it's strictly academic. It might not be a bad system, but it has no
>chance of becoming real. It's too much against free market and copyright.

No more than everything else. Copyright is rather an exception when
compared with other things sold and bought on free market. Then I
don't see copyright as a sacred cow. The story of DCMA indicates shows
to which dangerous aberration this idea may lead. It should be
publicly rethought whether copyright and patent law respond their
intention: to reward creators in the public interest.

>Which, like or not, are here to stay for a long time.

I would not be so sure. The present model is so inefficient that in
some period of time it would be impossible to keep on with software
development [of exponentially growing complexity]. Note that all
economical growth will depend on software developing. At this moment
either we will be able to drastically improve software quality, safety
and reuse, or our civilisation will collapse.

>However, even in the current system, it is not clear that some licenses are
>not void, or enforceable. For example, GPL has not been in court yet, and
>some people including legal minds have doubts it will have any force there.

--
Regards,
Dmitry Kazakov
www.dmitry-kazakov.de