Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> LOL.
>
> backinfullforce commented (quoting smarty EASTERBROOK):
>
> ------
> "Copyright law gives authors *a right* to charge more, so that they can
> recover their fixed costs ( and thus promote innovation ), but they do
> *not require* authors to charge more. You hear that, Williams? You are
> not required to charge more once a piece of your intellectual property
> exists.
> ------
>
> And so it is perfectly okay for copyleft ("free as in freedom") to
> suppress *a right* given by copyright law
Since when does copyright law secure a right to create and
redistribute derivative works without asking the original author? In
fact, this is pretty much what copyright law intends to prohibit.
> and *require* to charge zero to cover costs of creating a piece of
> intellectual property to exist.
>
> Impeccable logic.
Glass house.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
_______________________________________________
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
