Author: Albert Silver
Date: 12:10:37 12/10/05
Go up one level in this thread
On December 10, 2005 at 15:03:13, Uri Blass wrote:
>On December 10, 2005 at 08:48:07, Albert Silver wrote:
>
><snipped>
>>>No
>>>I did not say that I support doing something against the law.
>>>
>>>Uri
>>
>>True, but there is a suggested inferrence merely by the nature of the
>>possibilities you mention. For example, you don't list the more ethical
>>possibilities. Instead, you write along the lines of:
>>
>>- It's possible that he could sell a hundred programs,
>>- It's possible 1 million copies will be stolen,
>>- It's possible he will complain about his author rights
>>- It's possible that the world would be better without author rights
>>- Obviously leading to it's possible the world would be better if he had no
>>rights over his program
>>
>>The fact that you add "it's possible" in front of the dozen statements doesn't
>>change anything. This is actually covered in basic courses on logic BTW.
>>
>>Imagine instead if I were to write a post saying:
>>
>>- It's possible Uri is a dishonest person
>>- It's possible he wants to sabotage Rybka and the author
>>- It's possible he is redistributing Rybka via other channels (website, P2P,
>>etc.)
>>- It's possible he is also trying to decompile it to understand the code to
>>steal Vasik's ideas
>>- It's possible he would add these ideas to his program and then take credit for
>>them.
>>- It's possible ... etc.
>>
>>Note that I do not believe any of the above 'possibilities', but adding 'it's
>>possible" all the time wouldn't change the fact that I was effectively
>>mudslinging (deliberately trying to dirty your name).
>>
>> Albert
>
>I did not talk about specific person but about hypotetical case when there is no
>authors rights.
>
>Claiming that it is possible that piracy can help programmers is not blaming
>authors about something and what driven this discussion were the following
>words:
>
>"If that thinking was adopted as a general philosophy (which I know you have not
>said), have you considered what sort of world it would swiftly produce?"
>
>
>see http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?468545
>
>This leaded to discussion about hypotetical case of no author rights because
>author rights prevent many people to use a program when most of them are not
>going to buy it so you can claim that the demage to the author from no author
>rights is smaller than the advantage of the users and when I think about it I am
>not sure that there is always a demage to the author.
>
>There is a problem that people cannot compare between what happens and what does
>not happen so it is impossible to prove that the theory that author rights do
>not help the authors in some cases is not correct.
>
>You of course can say that you believe that it is not correct(I expressed no
>opinion except saying that I do not know) but there is no way to prove something
>about it so I think that it can be the end of this discussion.
>
>Uri
Ok, you don't know. What do you believe?
Albert
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.