4 ms·
The "You don't own it if you can't destroy it" discussion goes all the way back to people like Cicero and limitations on what you can and can not do with your s
by coretx 2mo ago
The "You don't own it if you can't destroy it" discussion goes all the way back to people like Cicero and limitations on what you can and can not do with your slaves.
What you desire is sensible and can only be achieved by political means; yet it is undermined already. Licenses are granted, not given. They remain the property of whoever issued it. Here fore, among other things, a discussion about property rights retains the frame used by those who abuse immaterial property rights. This is problematic because it's near impossible to achieve a political goal without setting the right language first.
- Magicrafter13 2mo ago> They remain the property of whoever issued it. What exactly do you mean by this? Licenses like the CC suite, and the GNU GPL or MIT software licenses, cannot be revoked after the fact, nor changed. The licensor can choose to stop publishing a work under, for example, CC, but all those who still have a CC licensed copy of the work may continue to use it according to that license. And in fact, I believe they can even continue distributing it themselves, making a license change mostly useless (unless the work is updated I guess).