apotheon

19 ms·

121.
by apotheon 13y ago
There are reasons that using nothing but the Copyheart message to "free" a work is a bad idea. There are very good reasons to be opposed to the copyright regime under which we labor, however. As someone whose professional life has been pr
122.
by apotheon 13y ago
Use a simple license written with at least some vague grasp of the needs of copyright law for licensing, please. Much as I respect the people associated with Copyheart (Nina Paley, who I think created this whole Copyheart thing, is the "ar
123.
by apotheon 13y ago
It's also trying to solve a problem CC created -- the proliferation of mutually-incompatibly licensed works whose license terms are so overly complex (and so poorly presented) that most people using them don't really understand what they do
124.
by apotheon 14y ago
Yeah . . . it looks like Arch has gotten to the point where it just kinda violates all the points of the so-called Arch Way wholesale, even worse than the mainstream (supposedly) Unix-like OSes tend to violate the so-called Unix Philosophy
125.
by apotheon 14y ago
> I will probably be proved wrong as systemd matures, but right now it's just not the case. Yeah . . . I doubt it. I made the switch to FreeBSD as my primary OS of choice back in 2005 or 2006 without being 100% certain why I decided to
126.
by apotheon 14y ago
Maybe it has something to do with the fact that this is very relevant to matters such as business models and software development.
127.
by apotheon 14y ago
> On the other hand, and contrary to the article, I think the current problem with the music industry is not due to copyright but due to financial monopolies (the labels) that are outmoded but hang on for dear live. How do you think the
128.
by apotheon 14y ago
> I have never seen anyone . . . I have. I see it all the time, mostly in online discussion. No, I don't maintain a database of every such discussion in which I've participated, tagged with metadata about the fallacies employed in var
129.
by apotheon 14y ago
> clearly we produce vastly more new works under copyright than we ever did when we relied on patronage. When patronage was en vogue, we didn't have as high a rate of literacy or access to digital editing tools. These facilitations of
130.
by apotheon 14y ago
> But a big piece of the trouble is that if you take any given business model, chances are the artist can make at least trivially more money by exercising some of the control the copyright monopoly provides over the work. And if copyrig
131.
by apotheon 14y ago
> industrial-scale Define that in a way that makes it intrinsically desirable. Otherwise, it's a red herring.
132.
by apotheon 14y ago
Your go-to source argues that the point of copyright and patent monopolies is actually to incentivize innovation, which conflicts with your own claim that the purpose of copyright and patent monopolies is not to incentivize innovation: &#62
133.
by apotheon 14y ago
Your bar for "sound economic footing" is set very low.
134.
by apotheon 14y ago
> It's a viable business model in the small, not when you're developing software for a huge market where a handful of customers can't bankroll future versions of the software. That depends entirely on your apparent assumption that only
135.
by apotheon 14y ago
> Free-riding is a narrower concept than simply reduced incentives. AnthonyMouse didn't say otherwise. This is a non-sequitur. > free-riding addresses the specific case of where the ability to copy a design cheaply and easily and t
136.
by apotheon 14y ago
This commentary of yours was well-answered by AnthonyMouse. I just have to add a point of emphasis, and a chastisement: The notion that Thomas Jefferson was a proponent of copyright and patent law is just flat-out wrong. He was profoundly
137.
by apotheon 14y ago
exactly that If net neutrality applied to service providers, Wikipedia would have been "guilty" of violating the ethic of network neutrality just for its boycott action earlier this year on the Internet blackout day to drum up opposition to
138.
by apotheon 14y ago
1. Prior art doesn't stop the patent office from issuing patents, so that's not going to help. 2. Patentocalypse is a great way to kill off startups that actually succeed and open source projects, so big business campaign contributors will
139.
by apotheon 14y ago
Well . . . use a salt and it seems this patent is trivially bypassed. Voila!
140.
Developing software as if quality matters(barelyenough.org)
1 points by apotheon 15y ago|0 comments
141.
by apotheon 15y ago
re: 3 . . . BSD/Copyfree vs. Corporate Copyleft : http://sob.apotheon.org/?p=622 It has been addressed elsewhere.
142.
by apotheon 15y ago
Wow -- it's like these guys have never heard of anything other than C, C++, or C#.
143.
by apotheon 15y ago
> Well that's perfectly fair if that's what the original author wants. [. . .] You are, after all, wanting to use MY copyrighted code to build something and distribute it. The form of your commentary here seems to assume that appamatto
144.
by apotheon 15y ago
interesting topic, lame explanation
145.
by apotheon 15y ago
I think the "any interesting feature" in this case is the fact it uses JSON rather than s-expressions. This may not be a feature you think it needs, but it's interesting nonetheless.
146.
by apotheon 15y ago
That's kind of an inappropriate response. Pointing out one has implemented Scheme with all the bells and whistles as a condition in which the implementor is still interested in Lisp implementations and similar stuff is not a pretension or
147.
by apotheon 15y ago
I think the USPTO tries to use stuff like this as a way to seem like the good guy, distracting from the way its half-assed approach to managing patents just completely screws so much of the US economy.
148.
by apotheon 15y ago
s/Telsa/Tesla/ Basically everything Edison supposedly invented was actually pretty much plagiarized by someone else, then credited to himself by way of a patent. Tesla was quite possibly his most-wronged victim. Far from protecting creato
149.
by apotheon 15y ago
> I suspect it's true in the NH bubble, but I strongly suspect that very few pirates then go on to buy the product. I think that in other conditions where pirates never go on to buy something they've pirated (gawd, "pirate" is such an a
150.
by apotheon 15y ago
If you get fifteen times as many people downloading as otherwise would have, and 90% of the people who download haven't paid for it (yet), you still come out ahead. There's nothing awful about a business model like that, period. Never j

More ›