Re: VAX software available for download

• Previous message: WhoDat?: "Re: VAX software available for download"
• In reply to: Bill Gunshannon: "Re: VAX software available for download"
• Next in thread: Bill Gunshannon: "Re: VAX software available for download"
• Reply: Bill Gunshannon: "Re: VAX software available for download"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 16:23:36 +0000 (UTC)

In article <3id40uFkuqr6U1@individual.net>, bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:
> >
> > maybe the US is located on another planet,
> > but where I live I go into shop and can buy a car,
> > either new or used, with no restrictions on its use
> > and full rights to resell it.
>
> Really? Over here you have to get the governments permission in the
> form of a drivers license and a vehicle registration before you can
> even drive it off the lot. The latter requires that you do business
> with another business in the form of getting insurance.

yes, but these are restrictions imposed by law,
and not by the car maker. I give money, he gives car.

> >
> > Not quite. I don't know the US situation but over here
> > we have the concept of "immoral contracts".
>
> We have the concept of illegal contracts as well, but you would have
> a real hard time convincing a court that the VMS license is somehow
> an illegal contract. Especially when you consider that there is no
> reason why you had to enter into the contract in the first place unless
> you wanted to.
>
> > Don't know if I could translate that correctly,
>
> Es ist mir egal. Ich spreche auch Deutsch.

But not all potential listeners. The german term is "sittenwidrig".
Back to the topic. It's not about the VMS license in particular,
it's about rights the producers still claims after the customer
has given his money,

> > but an (admittedly exaggerated) example would be to hire a contract killer
> > for some job and not paying him for his work. The contract is void
> > from the very beginning, so he has zero chance to get his money, legally.
> > (Of course being a professional, he will find ways to get his money, though :-)
>
> Surely your not equating VMS Licensing with hiring a hitman!! :-)

as said, exaggerated example.
But at least it generated some smileys :-)
 
> > Or another, less exaggerated example: Surrogacy (? if some woman pays
> > some other woman to be pregnant instead of herself) is probably
> > allowed in the US, strictly forbidden over here. The contract,
> > no matter if both agreed, is void.
>
> But, like I said, you would have a hard time proving anything wrong
> with the contract nature of the VMS License or pretty much any soft-
> ware license, unless you know one that requires giving up your first-
> born male shild for the software.

I brought this up as an example that contracts are not always
at will of its parties. Some contracts could be void from the
beginning by law.

>
> Why more consumer friendly? The consumer is neither the owner or
> the one who put the effort into developing the product. Why should
> the consumer desires be held higher than the developer?

Why should it be the other way round (in your favor) ?
In the end, it's a matter of power.
 
>
> Maybe, but doesn't change the fact that it is the labors of the producer
> that resulted in the product in the first place. What does the consumer
> bring to the table beyond a desire to have someone else's property?

His money.
 
> >
> >> There is nothing
> >> I can see that supports this premise.
> >
> > Sure. Why should *your* way be the best ?
> > I can see nothing that supports this premise.
>
> I find that statement hard to believe. How would you feel if you and
> one other person went out to dig a hole, you did all the work and the
> other guy got paid? That's basicly what your asking for. You want
> the producer to not be paid what he thinks is a fair wage for his
> labors. If DEC were told up front that it would not be allowed to
> profit from any software it wrote do you think VMS would even exist?

Again, I never have written that I wouldn't pay a software maker
for his work. It's just that I would not like to be restricted by
him to use the product.
 
>
> The fact that you express the idea that individuals are not entitled to
> the fruits of their labors.

What makes you think so ?
I bring my hard-earned money to some software maker and he still wants
to teach me how I should not use his product ?
 
> >
> > Again, what makes you think so ?
>
> You said so. You claim that I do not have the right to set a price on
> my labors. That I should be compelled to meet your desires rather than
> my own.

No I didn't. You can set the price (in $), and I can choose if I buy or not.
But once I buy, I want to have the right to do what I want.

> >
> > Oh plz, not this one ! Open Source == communism, plz, leave me alone
> > with this stuff !
>
> I didn't say that. I am totally in favor of Open Source. But not
> forced Open Source. Again, if the producer wants to put his work
> out there for the public that's fine. He is getting what he wanted
> for his labors. But no one else should have the ability to force
> another's labors into the Open Source world.

It's your choice if you give away source code or not.

> The producer, by the
> act of creating his work, has earned the right to determine when,
> where, and how it will be used. No one else.

Yes and no. Once the customer pays, he should have the rights.
I really see no logic difference to other goods.
 
> > The soviet union crashed for a lot of reasons, but certainly
> > not due to IP disregard. Plz.
>
> There was no "property" in the Soviet Union.

Sure there was. Not property in the sense of means of production
(that's what communism is all about).
But AFAIK you could own some land for personal use.

> There was no reward for
> excellence.

Sure there was. You just couldn't "make" billions of $$$$,
(except, of course, you were higher up in the "communist" party)
 
> There was no reward for anything beyond the mediocre.

And how come that the soviets had nuclear weapons only
shortly after the US, despite the industrial part of their country was
mostly destroyed by the german armies ?
(not that I think that this is something one should be proud of)
Shall I say Sputnik ?

> The
> result, after a few generations, was no innovation, no work beyond the
> bare minimum required

The russian (or other eastern bloc) scientists
I met in the late 80s to early 90s were
quite knowledgeable people. They just didn't have the material
resources as the western people.

> and the eventual colapse as they could no longer
> compete with a world that was striving for excellence. The result was
> inevitable.

It's an example that an inept stalinist party can't run a country
with five year plans dictating everything in detail down to the production
of shoelaces. Little else.

• Previous message: WhoDat?: "Re: VAX software available for download"
• In reply to: Bill Gunshannon: "Re: VAX software available for download"
• Next in thread: Bill Gunshannon: "Re: VAX software available for download"
• Reply: Bill Gunshannon: "Re: VAX software available for download"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]