Notices by Robert (rsf92@fosstodon.org)

Cory Doctorow utterly destroyed Microsoft in his latest column
https://pluralistic.net/2024/06/14/patch-tuesday/

Like, subscribe to @pluralistic and don't forget to leave a comment!

"Geometry hates Tesla, and physics hates Starlink. Reality has a leftist bias. The future is fiber, and public transit. These are both vastly preferable, more efficient, safer, more reliable and more plausible than satellite and private vehicles. Their only disadvantage is that they fail to give an easily gulled, thin-skinned compulsive liar more power over billions of people. That's a disadvantage I can live with."

https://pluralistic.net/2024/05/16/symmetrical-10gb-for-119/

Great piece by @pluralistic

@KevinCarson1 @notroot @cstross @pleaseclap @exception
People always forget that the entire argument about copyright and patent is not some form of "property rights" thing, but whether art and science/technology can be funded without them.

I believe they can, that's why I'm against "IP"

Plus, I like my GNU/Linux setup, and part has to be with the philosophy under which it developed (users guide the development of technology)

@notroot @KevinCarson1 @cstross @pleaseclap @exception
Sorry but strong disagree here.

As Kevin said, plagiarism is a very different thing from copyright infringement. It's fraud and it's covered with the same law as any other fraud (at least it should/would).

As for sales, there are other ways to get profits without copyright in the 21st century, you can presale books like @pluralistic does with his audio books.
(1/3)

@notroot @KevinCarson1 @cstross @pleaseclap @exception @pluralistic

As for the it's mine, if you want a copy just ask.

First, what exactly is yours?

Second, taken strictly, that would ban the second hand market and goes against the first sale doctrine.

Third, I think people have the moral intuition that if you pay to get some work, the author should get a share, the case with Tolkien and LOTR would be an example.
(2/3)

@notroot @pluralistic @KevinCarson1 @cstross @pleaseclap @exception
I think it's you who is confusing things.

Copyright, by it's own name, implies a right to make copies, which is a production right. There are also moral rights, which, as I mentioned earlier, can be covered by other laws or social norms.

The issue is not about what's wrong with copyright, but about what does it acomplish that can't be acomplished any other way vs the evils it produces

@notroot @pluralistic @KevinCarson1 @cstross @pleaseclap @exception
Making copies of things is essentially what computers do. To prevent that, in today's world, requires intervention with basic people's possesions.
That's why copyrights are a tcing of the past. See this talk by Richard Stallman on the topic, for example

https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/copyright-versus-community.en.html

That's the main point, actually. Benefit vs cost, it's no longer a fair exchange.

Btw Kevin is an author too

Support the @fsf fundraiser here

https://www.fsf.org/appeal/2023-fall/free-software-free-society-free-education

And help fight for a world where knowledge and software are free, no that people can use and adapt It to fit their needs.

Software freedom is human freedom!