| 1 |
> > Closed Source isn't Intellectual Property. Intellectual Property |
| 2 |
> > merely is what it is. And what it is quite simply is 'property' (in |
| 3 |
> > whatever physical manifestation that takes) generated by one's |
| 4 |
> > Intellect(good old grey matter). Closed or Open source is merely a |
| 5 |
> > legal framework that defines how persons (other then the 'owner' of |
| 6 |
> > said IP) may use the IP in question. |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> > Organizations like Microsoft chose to put a heavily restrictive legal |
| 10 |
> > framework around the IP (closed source) whereas FLOSS organizations |
| 11 |
> > tend to put less restrictive legal frameworks around their IP (open |
| 12 |
> > source). And regardless of how restrictive (or not) the legal |
| 13 |
> > framework is, it still exists in one form or another. |
| 14 |
> > |
| 15 |
> > |
| 16 |
> > -Drew |
| 17 |
> but it is very often used combined, when you will ask ATI "why cannot |
| 18 |
> you open drivers" you will hear "because of there are a number of |
| 19 |
> patents which we 'probably violate' so we cannot open source" |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
For sure. That's the nature of the protective legal framework, namely |
| 22 |
that it cascades to further derivative works. I also think in that's |
| 23 |
Ati playing CYA. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
> and - of course - the second, more dangerous sample could be Microsoft, |
| 26 |
> with all this actions which can cause the "moving on the screen cursor" |
| 27 |
> will be unavailable for other then M$ systems, because it violates their |
| 28 |
> patents, and their engineers and their families will die from hunger if |
| 29 |
> we will not buy their OS |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Let's not get started on that 'patent'. I'd prefer the start to my |
| 32 |
weekend to be peaceful. ;-) |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
> of course, this is very simplified what I said, however this business |
| 35 |
> model is really not so good for the development of culture, technology, |
| 36 |
> --->> whole humanity.... |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
Totally. However, I can also understand the counterpoint of why people |
| 39 |
might want to put restrictive protections on something they created. |
| 40 |
The profit motive is a strong driver in the western world and anything |
| 41 |
that gives me an edge over the competition, "that's a good thing." |
| 42 |
(tm) |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
-Drew |
| 46 |
-- |
| 47 |
gentoo-amd64@g.o mailing list |
Archives