"Why does there have to be only two options? Shouldn't those who create something have the ability to gain from it, as well as enrich the world? "
You dont need copyright to make money. Sell the service of music creation, if the creators stop creating music well then people will have to pay so they create it.
We all know the creators will never stop creating and there will be endless supply, so why should musicians make so much money as if they are so valueable? I'm a musician, I can make music, should I demand millions of dollars if the music I make is only average?
Now, if my music changes the world, people will pay millions of dollars because they will be fans, people will go to my concerts.
When you decide on something, when you decide if its right or wrong, do you look at how something benifits you?
Well you can say Piracy benifits you because you save money and get free times, OK.
You can also say Piracy benifits the majority of the people on this planet who also cannot afford to buy $500 software and $20 CDs.
So, what it comes down to is, Piracy is good because the majority of the people on this planet benifit from Piracy more than we benifit from not being pirates.
So Piracy is good because it benifits the common man. Intellectual property benifits maybe %1 of the worlds population if that, 99 percent of people in the USA do not own intellectual propery, most musicians dont have record deals, they dont make money off of their art.
Most people in other countries do not have the money to buy patented medications, most people on this planet simply do not have or own any information.
Why should we, the common man and owners of all information which man produces, give ownership to a select few when we can all own it?
Think about it, how do YOU benifit by giving Sony the right to own music? How do YOU benifit? You dont benifit at all by doing this, so why do it?
Because its right? Its more right to share than it is to own.
Option A, people who make something always own what they make forever.
Option B, people who make things share what they make with all of humanity.
The same arguement which claims we should have software be open source because it benifits the whole instead of one part of the whole is the same arguement we use with file sharing.
More people benifit from file sharing than those who dont, the purpose of technology is to benifit the people.
When deciding what is more ethical, I look at patents as something mythical in my world, I do not know anyone who owns a patent in anything. I know musicians like my mother or my father who both make music but never made any money.
I make music but I never make any money. I know artists who when they make art because they have to begin to not like drawing anymore. Some things are meant to be an art, and some things are meant to be a business.
Its not very logical to try to turn bits of information into a product, it doenst benifit the majority of the people in this world. People in africa cannot buy medicinee because of this. People in afganastan cannot get educated because of patents on books. People in the USA cannot learn programming or be productive in todays society because of patents.
Why do we need patents? So a few hundred people can make billions of dollars? How does this help me? IT doesnt, I benifit more from Open Source than I do from closed source because I have no money.
I benifit more from file sharing because if there were no napsters and gnutellas of the world I simply wouldnt have the money to listen to music AT ALL, PERIOD.
Re:But they are open source
on
Mandrake News
·
· Score: 2
So now they make money from selling something thats free? What kinda BS is this?
Not even redhat makes money by SELLING redhat linux, they make money by selling services.
Mandrake Linux is extremely important because its the only Desktop Linux that gives a damn about the community, Redhat doesnt, Lycoris and Lindows doesnt, Suse and United Linux dont.
So your only other options are Debian, and Slackware.
Its watered down and fake, its not very flexible, they dont listen to or care about the community,
Linux Mandrake actually listens to the community.
The only linux community for newbies is mandrake, debian is too hard, Lycoris is too much like windows to be considered linux, and Lindows is totally corperate.
I say its a donation because people are saying mandrake is a donation. So to you people anything thats optional and gives more freedom is begging and or a donation, you are killing the whole open source economic model by stereotyping it.
Mandrakesoft gives you free access to download software, they freely allow a programmer to work on KDE and the Linux Kernel, they freely give you a website, Mandrake Expert, Mandrake Forum etc,
You cant donate some money to keep these free services? I guess you dont really want them.
If PS2 were giving out free games why not donate $60 once in a great while?
Redhat gives away the code and the OS. So you say you'd pay for a redhat subscription in one moment (a donation to redhat) then in the next sentence you dont donate money to for profit corps?
Stop making excuses. IF you dont like the software they make dont subscribe, just like if you dont like AOLs software you wont subscribe to AOL, and if you dont like Cable TVs channels you wont subscribe to this, and if you dont like Redhat network you wont subscribe to that,
but please do not complain about the business model, you know this is the same Model redhat uses and the only model which works.
Or RedHat, Mandrake provides a service. This is their business.
Re:Mandrake Club IS a service
on
Mandrake News
·
· Score: 2
Mandrake club has nothing to do with donating, your money goes directly to pay for the code production, the website, its a membership you fool.
Mandrake Club IS a service
on
Mandrake News
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
What the hell do you think your money pays for? The service of producing code, the service of being able to download the ISO, the service of being able to access all the code, the service of being able to get all this great software packaged up, the service of Linux Mandrake.
Open Source software is NOT a product, its a service, CLOSED SOURCE SOFTWARE IS A PRODUCT.
Theres a difference
Microsoft is releasing their source code?
on
Mandrake News
·
· Score: 2
I'd donate money to Microsoft if they were going to release the source code to Windows.
Slashdot Mirror
In most situations I do whats best for mankind before doing whats best for me.
The only time I do whats best for me over whats best for mankind is when I must protect myself or those I love.
In the situation of patents, no one I love or care about gains anything from patents, it has NO value to me.
It has no value to the majority of the people on this planet. The purpose of an economy is to help everyone, not just help the top 1%.
So why do we need patents? You are sharing your knowledge now, Do you need to patent this quote and sell it?
Artists can make money without patents, its called selling services instead of the music itself, selling the service of actually making the music.
If you buy a hamburger from mc donalds you arent really paying for the beef and bread you are paying for them to prepare you a burger on command.
So why cant musicians make money by playing in concerts and creating music for their fans?
Let the musician sell his own Mp3s.
"Why does there have to be only two options? Shouldn't those who create something have the ability to gain from it, as well as enrich the world?
"
You dont need copyright to make money. Sell the service of music creation, if the creators stop creating music well then people will have to pay so they create it.
We all know the creators will never stop creating and there will be endless supply, so why should musicians make so much money as if they are so valueable? I'm a musician, I can make music, should I demand millions of dollars if the music I make is only average?
Now, if my music changes the world, people will pay millions of dollars because they will be fans, people will go to my concerts.
When you decide on something, when you decide if its right or wrong, do you look at how something benifits you?
Well you can say Piracy benifits you because you save money and get free times, OK.
You can also say
Piracy benifits the majority of the people on this planet who also cannot afford to buy $500 software and $20 CDs.
So, what it comes down to is, Piracy is good because the majority of the people on this planet benifit from Piracy more than we benifit from not being pirates.
So Piracy is good because it benifits the common man. Intellectual property benifits maybe %1 of the worlds population if that, 99 percent of people in the USA do not own intellectual propery, most musicians dont have record deals, they dont make money off of their art.
Most people in other countries do not have the money to buy patented medications, most people on this planet simply do not have or own any information.
Why should we, the common man and owners of all information which man produces, give ownership to a select few when we can all own it?
Think about it, how do YOU benifit by giving Sony the right to own music? How do YOU benifit?
You dont benifit at all by doing this, so why do it?
Because its right? Its more right to share than it is to own.
Theres two options.
Option A, people who make something always own what they make forever.
Option B, people who make things share what they make with all of humanity.
The same arguement which claims we should have software be open source because it benifits the whole instead of one part of the whole is the same arguement we use with file sharing.
More people benifit from file sharing than those who dont, the purpose of technology is to benifit the people.
When deciding what is more ethical, I look at patents as something mythical in my world, I do not know anyone who owns a patent in anything. I know musicians like my mother or my father who both make music but never made any money.
I make music but I never make any money. I know artists who when they make art because they have to begin to not like drawing anymore. Some things are meant to be an art, and some things are meant to be a business.
Its not very logical to try to turn bits of information into a product, it doenst benifit the majority of the people in this world. People in africa cannot buy medicinee because of this. People in afganastan cannot get educated because of patents on books. People in the USA cannot learn programming or be productive in todays society because of patents.
Why do we need patents? So a few hundred people can make billions of dollars? How does this help me? IT doesnt, I benifit more from Open Source than I do from closed source because I have no money.
I benifit more from file sharing because if there were no napsters and gnutellas of the world I simply wouldnt have the money to listen to music AT ALL, PERIOD.
So now they make money from selling something thats free? What kinda BS is this?
Not even redhat makes money by SELLING redhat linux, they make money by selling services.
Mandrake Linux is extremely important because its the only Desktop Linux that gives a damn about the community, Redhat doesnt, Lycoris and Lindows doesnt, Suse and United Linux dont.
So your only other options are Debian, and Slackware.
Theres no community for newbies without Mandrake.
Its watered down and fake, its not very flexible, they dont listen to or care about the community,
Linux Mandrake actually listens to the community.
The only linux community for newbies is mandrake, debian is too hard, Lycoris is too much like windows to be considered linux, and Lindows is totally corperate.
All of these products are made, what has FSF made lately?
The other distros, lets see, how many newbies can install slackware or debian?
Thank you.
I say its a donation because people are saying mandrake is a donation.
So to you people anything thats optional and gives more freedom is begging and or a donation, you are killing the whole open source economic model by stereotyping it.
Why dont you email them that and tell them that.
Tell them you want them to set it up so we can sponser developers
Why worry about the other guy?
Fact is you see benifit if you donate, and if you dont donate you dont see any benifit.
Mandrakesoft gives you free access to download software, they freely allow a programmer to work on KDE and the Linux Kernel, they freely give you a website, Mandrake Expert, Mandrake Forum etc,
You cant donate some money to keep these free services? I guess you dont really want them.
If PS2 were giving out free games why not donate $60 once in a great while?
Subscribe to transgaming instead
Donate $300 to bill gates.
They should just say "Only club members can Download Linux Mandrake, Join the Club or Leave the site"
This is what you want isnt it?
Redhat gives away the code and the OS. So you say you'd pay for a redhat subscription in one moment (a donation to redhat) then in the next sentence you dont donate money to for profit corps?
Do you work for Redhat?
You donate money to Redhat when you subcribe to their services, how is it any different than subscribing to Mandrakesoft?
It works for Redhat because Redhat targets a userbase thats not filled with greedy chumps like you who want freebies.
If you use their software why shouldnt you support the development of this software?
Are you an idiot?
You subscribe so that you can get more of the software you value.
Stop making excuses.
IF you dont like the software they make dont subscribe, just like if you dont like AOLs software you wont subscribe to AOL, and if you dont like Cable TVs channels you wont subscribe to this, and if you dont like Redhat network you wont subscribe to that,
but please do not complain about the business model, you know this is the same Model redhat uses and the only model which works.
FSF? What software have they released lately?
We need to support software which actually matters and Mandrake is the only real desktop distribution thats for the community.
Lycoris and Lindows are both horrible sellout distros which arent really linux.
Or RedHat, Mandrake provides a service. This is their business.
Mandrake club has nothing to do with donating, your money goes directly to pay for the code production, the website, its a membership you fool.
What the hell do you think your money pays for? The service of producing code, the service of being able to download the ISO, the service of being able to access all the code, the service of being able to get all this great software packaged up, the service of Linux Mandrake.
Open Source software is NOT a product, its a service, CLOSED SOURCE SOFTWARE IS A PRODUCT.
Theres a difference
I'd donate money to Microsoft if they were going to release the source code to Windows.