On 03/08/12 02:09, Celejar wrote:
On Thu, 02 Aug 2012 18:17:56 -0500 John Hasler<jhasler@newsguy.com> wrote:Celejar writes:This is dogma.It's just advice to someone who seems to think that owning copyrights makes the publishers his "masters".Fair enough.There is a great deal of software, and certainly other cultural material (books, movies, music) out there which has no FLOSS equivalent, and I don't have the time / skill to manufacture my own.Do as you will. The point is, you don't actually _need_ that stuff.Quite true.You peruse it by choice (and so do I (except for the movies)).Agreed.Is it really reasonable to refuse to read all books that have not been released under a FLOSS license?It is evidently feasible to not read at all. I'm sure you have neighbors and/or coworkers who are living example of that.True. Celejar
Ho hum. I just have to wade in with one additional point. Back in the day I remember when CD-ROMs were being promoted/released. I think it was on Blue Peter.They demonstrated how robust a medium it was by spreading marmalade (it's like jam) on the thing, wiping it off and showing that it still worked.
These days I don't dare look sideways at a CDs or DVDs in case they catch a scratch.
I'm backing up my collection onto hard disk and I'm using a CD/DVD repair kit, and I have to use it once or twice on those items I watch more frequently, "oh gee, I must have watched that one a lot, out with the repair kit".
This is all going to change once augmented reality really kicks in - last time I checked you could still invite friends over to watch a movie or listen to music.
Once "your place" becomes virtual, no copyright laws are being broken, or am I wrong here?
Regards, Philip Ashmore