On Tue, Jul 24, 2007 at 11:03:15PM +0900, John Joyce wrote:
> On Jul 24, 2007, at 5:04 AM, Brad Phelan wrote:
> >Chad Perrin wrote:
> >>On Tue, Jul 24, 2007 at 06:49:59PM +0900, Brad Phelan wrote:
> >>>However it always stuns me when software geeks come with  
> >>>arguments as previously posted because we are meant to be  
> >>>abstract thinkers. However I keep hearing the same old argument  
> >>>along the lines of `if I can't kick it, it has no value and  
> >>>should be free.`
> >>I don't recall anyone saying anything of the sort.  Maybe I'm just  
> >>not
> >>thinking abstractly enough to know where you got that.
> >
> >'governmentally enforced artificial scarcity model where software  
> >is treated as physical product units.'
> >
> >What does this mean other than that software has no inherent
> >monetary sale value other than that artificially imposed
> >by government control?
> >
> Which is exactly the kind of half logic that would debunk all  
> 'governmentally enforced' rights, property or otherwise.
> They're all artifices imposed by social constructs. Some of them work  
> and some don't. If they don't work, they're ideally changed/fixed.  
> But the ideal Star Trek world of no money and free and equal access  
> to everything is not going to happen any time soon.

Nonsense.

  1. It's not "half-logic" -- it's a factual description of the economic
  realities of the situation.

  2. It has no ability to debunk any (other) rights, especially
  (physical) property rights.  In fact, copyright and physical property
  rights are specifically in legally enforceable conflict with one
  another, as a prohibition against arranging pixels on a piece of paper
  and distributing that piece of paper just because the arranged pixels
  violate copyright with regards to the image produced conflicts with the
  proprietary rights of the owner of the ink, paper, and printer involved
  (for example).

  3. Rights are not "imposed" -- they are either protected or violated by
  "social constructs" (I assume you mostly allude to government with that
  phrase).

  4. Free and equal access to everything?  Nobody in this discussion
  said, or even implied, anything of the sort as far as I'm aware.

-- 
CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ http://ccd.apotheon.org ]
awj @reddit: "The terms never and always are never always true."