> -----Original Message-----
> From: pic microcontroller discussion list
> [mailto:PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU] On Behalf Of Juan Garofalo
> Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2004 5:59 PM
> To: PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU
> Subject: Re: SCO lobbying Congress about Linux
>
>
> Some points :
>
>
> a)
>
>         Scarcity regarding software means *scarcity of brains*. Real,
> physical brains. That's not created by law. To write complex
> software is not
> easy, that's why software has value. Any attempt to deny such
> a basic fact
> will lead to lots of nonsensical arguments.
>
>
> b)
>
>         Somebody tried to justify gratis software saying that
> copying is
> gratis. You need something known as the hardware industry to
> be able to copy
> (or run) software. I don't think silicon is gratis...
>
>         Even if copying were gratis, that has nothing to do
> with the price
> of software. That price is dictacted by development costs and
> profit. Supply
> and demand are secondary.
>
>         Software is not different from any manufacturing
> industry. There are
> costs, there are profits for the people who use their brains.
> Any argument
> against this is an argument against capitalism, individual
> rights, the open
> society, or whatever name you wish to give it. It's an
> argument about and
> against the very political foundations of society. Unless
> you're advocanting
> for a collectivist society...
>
>
> c)
>
>         The fact that an individual is able to enter into an
> open source
> contract, or not,  doesn't mean that the open source scheme
> is right, per se.
>
>         That is, trying to prove the economic soundness of open source
> because some people are willing to enter into open source
> contracts is a
> completly misleading argumentation.
>
>         I'm not ever using open source code if that means
> making my own code
> open source. Because I perfectly understand the legal
> framework that would
> bind me if I did. It would be a subverted law. I don't agree
> with a law (the
> OS licence) wich forces me to give my property away.
>
>         I'm not ever accepting that such an scheme(OSS) is a
> viable one for
> a market economy. I have all the proper arguments to back
> such an assertion.
>
>
> d)
>
>         I don't think Russell is a qualified speaker for what
> capitalism is.
> Just a correction, as a sample:
>
> Russell said:
>
> >A stock market crash constitutes fair dealing as long as
> >everyone concerned has dealt in a manner in accordance with
> pre-agreed
> >rules.
>
>         A stock market crash is caused by public policies.
> Inform yourself
> regarding the bussines cycle. http://www.mises.org.
>
>         Stock market crashes are caused by the mighty PUBLIC
> central bank
> inflating the money supply, that is, creating cheap money wich is
> malinvested in the stock exchange. Stock crashes are caused
> when capitalism
> is overriden by the will of a few 'selected' men who think
> that can dictate
> what the interest rate should be, i.e. Greenspan. That's not
> capitalism but
> lack thereof.
>
>
> e)
>
>                 Wouter answers part of my message confusing a
> quotation from
> Jeff Byron with my own content...read carefully.
>
>
>
> Regards.
>
> Juan.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>         If programming were so value-free that anybody could
> write anything,
> without effort, I don't know why I have to pay for my 3D animation and
> modelling software. I'm more or less aquainted with that
> market and I know
> what features I can get for free, and what features I need to
> pay for. That
> is, I, as a customer know what I'm talking about, as opposed
> to socialist
> daydreaming.
>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
> [PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads
>

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads