So by that level of thinking paying 20k for a chunk of metal fashioned into a car is unreasonable?
When we have Star Trek style replicators that can instantly materialize an endless number of perfect car copies for essentially no cost, then yes it will be.
Unlike data the scarcity of automobiles is not artificial. You need materials, engineering, and labor to make each car.
In summary, you're an idiot and you will remain an idiot for as long as you talk about things you clearly don't understand. That's what idiots do.
The initial version, patches, support, and other infrastructure are all labor that go into making the software. In additions to all this, there are fringe costs, such as the building, power, computers, administrative support, social security fees, and so forth. The fact that the marginal cost of production is zero is neither here nor there. Investments must be recouped, or there will be no investments to speak of.
Corporate/private patronage and episodic content releases based on player prepayments could solve this problem. It's true the industry would be different and possibly smaller, but not gone. Someone would find a way to make money even if software was free, and the public domain would greatly benefit.
Well; regardless of more controversial positions on copyright, I've thought for a while that software copyright should be about 7 years or so, and then completely expire. I really don't think all works are created equal. Things that have a short value on the market should not have the near-indefinite copyright that they do today. Rather, it should transition to the commons soon enough that it still has some value to the commons.
Using my approach, the creator of the software still has every reasonable abilit
Veni, Vidi, VISA:
I came, I saw, I did a little shopping.
Yeah but does it work on Linux? (Score:-1, Troll)
Didn't think so, therefore I'm not interested. Linux defines who I am.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:0)
If refusing to pay for a sequence of bits is considered cheap, then yes, by all means, call me cheap.
Re: (Score:0)
So by that level of thinking paying 20k for a chunk of metal fashioned into a car is unreasonable?
Re: (Score:-1)
So by that level of thinking paying 20k for a chunk of metal fashioned into a car is unreasonable?
When we have Star Trek style replicators that can instantly materialize an endless number of perfect car copies for essentially no cost, then yes it will be.
Unlike data the scarcity of automobiles is not artificial. You need materials, engineering, and labor to make each car.
In summary, you're an idiot and you will remain an idiot for as long as you talk about things you clearly don't understand. That's what idiots do.
Re: (Score:5, Insightful)
The initial version, patches, support, and other infrastructure are all labor that go into making the software. In additions to all this, there are fringe costs, such as the building, power, computers, administrative support, social security fees, and so forth. The fact that the marginal cost of production is zero is neither here nor there. Investments must be recouped, or there will be no investments to speak of.
Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (Score:2)
Corporate/private patronage and episodic content releases based on player prepayments could solve this problem. It's true the industry would be different and possibly smaller, but not gone. Someone would find a way to make money even if software was free, and the public domain would greatly benefit.
Re: (Score:2)
Well; regardless of more controversial positions on copyright, I've thought for a while that software copyright should be about 7 years or so, and then completely expire. I really don't think all works are created equal. Things that have a short value on the market should not have the near-indefinite copyright that they do today. Rather, it should transition to the commons soon enough that it still has some value to the commons.
Using my approach, the creator of the software still has every reasonable abilit