Re: intellectual property and UT's approach

[Francois-Rene Rideau <fare@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, Mar 21, 1999 at 01:46:35AM -0400, M. Simon wrote:
> Ownership is not evil. It is a natural right (OK so I'm a Libertarian).
Indeed. So am I. Now, *ideas* in general and *designs* in particular
cannot be owned, even less so than air.
See for instance
	http://www.tunes.org/~fare/articles/about_esr.html

> My point is sometimes you can make more money by giving everything away.
There is nothing to give, because there is no ownership right.
You make more money by not imposing protection barriers.
That's a basic free trade argument.

> When FORTH has no backing, only by making our technology completely open
> will confidence be inspired.
All the more when it's a self-extensible environment:
for protection barriers applied to information are meta-protection barriers,
and applied to development infrastructure, they are meta^2-protection
barriers.
	http://www.tunes.org/~fare/articles/ll99/index.en.html

[ "Faré" | VN: Уng-Vû Bân | Join the TUNES project!   http://www.tunes.org/  ]
[ FR: François-René Rideau | TUNES is a Useful, Nevertheless Expedient System ]
[ Reflection&Cybernethics  | Project for  a Free Reflective  Computing System ]
Because people confuse information and information-related services
(which include searching, creating, processing, transforming, selecting,
teaching, making available, guaranteeing, supporting, etc), they are afraid
that Free (libre) Information mean free (gratis) information-related services,
which would indeed kill the industry of said services. On the contrary,
Free Information would create a Free Market in these services, instead of
current monopolies, which means they will be available at a fair price,
so the result would be a flourishment of that industry!       -- Faré