There's no reason to explain why the GPL would eliminate competition, because it's reasonably assumed that you have a basic understanding of high school economics, which you appear to not have.
You seem to be confusing libertarianism with anarchy. Libertarians are more than happy to pay taxes to provide military and police force--protecting people from physical harm is what the government's job is.
There's nothing wrong with monopolies. The only time a monopoly becomes a problem is when the government supports it--see Standard Oil. If a monopoly got into the position it's in because it is simply by far the best provider of a product or service, there's nothing wrong with that. If the monopoly starts to become lazy, overcharge, etc., then competitors will arise and provide necessary pressure.
A monopoly like Standard Oil could never happen under lassiez-faire capitalism, because the government can't make laws with respect to the economy.
Actually, with fully privatized education, competition would likely drive prices down to levels affordable to most people. Even if it didn't, there would be plenty of charities or other private organizations willing to help out.
Even so, I don't really support fully private education. It seems to me there needs to be a heavily standardized educational "base." That's another post, though.
Good. If the only reason you're writing is to make a monetary profit, your words are sure to be a waste of paper (or whatever medium is involved).
That's bullshit, and you know it. No one becomes a writer just to make money (ask any author, they'll tell you it's not a very profitable business unless you're someone like Stephen King). However, to tell an author that they can't make money because it deprives everyone else of their right to copy whatever the author writes is ridiculous. How else will the author survive?
If someone wants to write just to make money, that should be their right. But if they actually want to make money, they better be a damn good writer--and, if that's true, what difference does their motive make?
You have no such freedom. You've never even had a semblance of such a freedom; all copyright ever created was an artificial right to a monopoly on making copies, which is a far cry from "control".
I have the freedom to allow my publisher exclusive rights to make copies, which I most certainly would do because they have the capability to have the book actually produced. That's infinitely more control than having it taken by whomever wants it.
Oh, I agree. I'm talking about taking the latest Stephen King bestseller and putting it out on the 'net. Copyrights definitely should have an expiration date (whereupon they can be renewed if desired).
It's not from the intangible "ideas" that authors are granted their right to life, it's the profit from the books that they write them down in--which is exactly what giving away free digital books would deprive the authors of.
I'm sorry, if I knew that any book I wrote would be given away for free at a library and copied endlessly between everyone and their friends, I wouldn't even bother to write. I know it's spiffy cool to think that making money is evil no matter what, in the real world people need to eat.
You want the "freedom" to get things for free and give them to all your friends. What about my freedom to control what happens to the things I produce?
Really. I'd be far more scared to walk down the street in Australia than I would in America. After all, Australia has the highest burglary, violent crime, and overall victimization rates in the entire world (it only falls second in car theft, of which England and Wales are the first).
Slashdot Mirror
Or you could just buy a laptop. Most laptops have external mouse/keyboard/VGA ports.
No wonder it's overheating.
Go ahead and demand it. See how far you get.
Congradulations, you've discovered why copyright was invented.
Well said.
Read the article, you stupid piece of shit.
There's no reason to explain why the GPL would eliminate competition, because it's reasonably assumed that you have a basic understanding of high school economics, which you appear to not have.
Interesting you should say that, as I have 200 233MHz PCs running Windows 98 with Office 97 perfectly fine, thank you very much.
Welcome to Slashdot.
See my post here. There is nothing inherently evil with monopolies that come about due to actual free-market competition.
You seem to be confusing libertarianism with anarchy. Libertarians are more than happy to pay taxes to provide military and police force--protecting people from physical harm is what the government's job is.
There's nothing wrong with monopolies. The only time a monopoly becomes a problem is when the government supports it--see Standard Oil. If a monopoly got into the position it's in because it is simply by far the best provider of a product or service, there's nothing wrong with that. If the monopoly starts to become lazy, overcharge, etc., then competitors will arise and provide necessary pressure.
A monopoly like Standard Oil could never happen under lassiez-faire capitalism, because the government can't make laws with respect to the economy.
Actually, with fully privatized education, competition would likely drive prices down to levels affordable to most people. Even if it didn't, there would be plenty of charities or other private organizations willing to help out. Even so, I don't really support fully private education. It seems to me there needs to be a heavily standardized educational "base." That's another post, though.
Good. If the only reason you're writing is to make a monetary profit, your words are sure to be a waste of paper (or whatever medium is involved).
That's bullshit, and you know it. No one becomes a writer just to make money (ask any author, they'll tell you it's not a very profitable business unless you're someone like Stephen King). However, to tell an author that they can't make money because it deprives everyone else of their right to copy whatever the author writes is ridiculous. How else will the author survive?
If someone wants to write just to make money, that should be their right. But if they actually want to make money, they better be a damn good writer--and, if that's true, what difference does their motive make?
You have no such freedom. You've never even had a semblance of such a freedom; all copyright ever created was an artificial right to a monopoly on making copies, which is a far cry from "control".
I have the freedom to allow my publisher exclusive rights to make copies, which I most certainly would do because they have the capability to have the book actually produced. That's infinitely more control than having it taken by whomever wants it.
Oh, I agree. I'm talking about taking the latest Stephen King bestseller and putting it out on the 'net. Copyrights definitely should have an expiration date (whereupon they can be renewed if desired).
It's not from the intangible "ideas" that authors are granted their right to life, it's the profit from the books that they write them down in--which is exactly what giving away free digital books would deprive the authors of.
I'm sorry, if I knew that any book I wrote would be given away for free at a library and copied endlessly between everyone and their friends, I wouldn't even bother to write. I know it's spiffy cool to think that making money is evil no matter what, in the real world people need to eat.
You want the "freedom" to get things for free and give them to all your friends. What about my freedom to control what happens to the things I produce?
You must really love your keyboard.
Really? That's the only thing that prevented me from using Mozilla before. I'll have to try it out.
Sorry, here's a link.
Really. I'd be far more scared to walk down the street in Australia than I would in America. After all, Australia has the highest burglary, violent crime, and overall victimization rates in the entire world (it only falls second in car theft, of which England and Wales are the first).
F news%2F2001%2F02%2F23%2Fncrim123.xml
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=%2
Interestingly enough, the USA isn't even in the top 10 for the four categories of crime reported on, except for burglary (which it's 7th).
Funny you should cite China. Isn't communism all about everyone beyong equal (or we'll kill you)?
I agree. Porper English is nowhere to be seen these days.
"Micro$haft"? What are you, 12?
It's not just liberals that want that out.