[OT] What is Open Source? (was Re: ANN: Twisted 0.16.0...)

[Christopher Browne]

Greg Ewing <greg at cosc.canterbury.ac.nz> wrote:
> Julian Tibble wrote:
>> 
>> erm... If there is no copyright then there is no *need* for copyleft.
>
> But if RMS would be happy with a world in which there
> was simply no copyright, he wouldn't bother with the
> GPL -- he could get the same effect just by putting
> all the stuff he writes in the public domain.
>
> The fact that he hasn't done that means he
> *does* want *some* kind of intellectual property
> laws.

Two fallacies here:

a) RMS would _not_ get the same effects via a "public domain" license.

   What he wants is for people to share code.  The "in the public
   domain" license certainly supports use; it has no inherent
   mechanism to encourage people to release code "in the public
   domain."

   The "quasi-viral nature" of the GPL is there to expressly encourage
   people to release code under the GPL.  That wouldn't be
   accomplished by "plain old P.D."

b) That "intellectual property" is a straightforward class of things
   that are logically grouped together.

   The only "common" thing between them is that lawyers have a
   specialty area they call "intellectual property."

   Copyright _isn't_ the same as patents which _aren't_ the same as
   trademarks, trade secrets, ad infinitum.  They're not intended to
   do similar things, they use different kinds of legal frameworks,
   they tend to be tied to different government departments, and
   generally function differently.
-- 
(reverse (concatenate 'string "gro.mca@" "enworbbc"))
http://www.cbbrowne.com/info/lisp.html
Walk softly and carry a megawatt laser.