4 ms·
The author is clueless about RMS: >is Richard Stallman seriously suggesting that it’s right to illegally obtain copyrighted software? Software is recored know
by 1gor 18y ago
The author is clueless about RMS:
>is Richard Stallman seriously suggesting that it’s right to illegally obtain copyrighted software?
Software is recored knowledge. Human progress means always building on top of somebody's knowledge. "Ownership" of knowledge is immoral and takes away human freedom. 'Copyrighted software' has no more rights to exist than 'copyrighted math'.
- PieSquared 18y agoI disagree. Code is more like literature than software. It is wrong to take it without prior owner's permission. Algorithms, and software ideas, however, are like math. So patents on software make no sense. There's a difference between code and algorithms; algorithms shouldn't be copyrighted/patented; code, on the other hand, is the property of whomever wrote it, and thus it may be copyrighted.
- bayareaguy 18y agoCode is more like literature than software. What code are you talking about? All of the code I have is software. It is wrong to take it without prior owner's permission. Is that always the case? It certainly isn't always true about literature. As an american I'm happy my country's founders didn't have to worry about getting permission to use the ideas that went into the literature of our government. Algorithms, and software ideas, however, are like math. They aren't just "like" math, they are math. They may be other things as well. Code is the property of whomever wrote it, and thus it may be copyrighted. Not all code is or should be that way. If you're going to compare code and literature, please keep in mind that the early history of literature was almost entirely devoted to maintaining social order and mundane matters of business transactions.