retard wrote:
That's hardly the case. One reason why open sourced books are so rare is that the capitalistic finance system competes with voluntary work. For example, when Andrei writes a book about D, he probably wants money (because life isn't free), money (because he wants to be richer than some low class douchebag trolling in the newsgroups), he wants fame (talks, job offers, other contacts), he wants to contribute to the development of D. If the money was provided by other means, there wouldn't be a need for profits from the book anymore, thus piracy would be acceptable.
I've never heard of anyone dissuaded from writing a free book because capitalist Andrei wrote one.
The plus side of capitalism is that it encourages writing books. The bad thing is (if you're a novelist), you basically *have to* always write something, because there's no other way to get money unless you change your profession.
It's bad that you have to work at your chosen profession? Is it also bad that a carpenter has to cut wood to get paid?
If you have high moral and you know that you can only write one good book during your lifetime, you should stop writing crappy books after The book and collecting money with your previous fame. Here, capitalism might encourage you to waste the rest of your time hurting the society. Capitalism isn't equal to justice in all cases.
I'm sorry, this just makes no sense to me. People change professions all the time under capitalism. Novelists aren't locked in to writing novels. They can switch to carpentry any time <g>.
(In fact, I know a programmer who switched to making ceramic pots.)
