Avoiding LispWorks Personal annoyances
in [Lisp]
|
Prev: &optional combined with &rest
Next: local-time on Clozure CL windows vista 64 Can't resolve foreign symbol "gettimeofday"
From: Dave Searles on 11 Oct 2009 12:29 Ron Garret wrote: > In article <harh9i$js2$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, > Dave Searles <searles(a)hoombah.nurt.bt.uk> wrote: > >> Ron Garret wrote: >>> In article <hapavk$es$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, >>> Dave Searles <searles(a)hoombah.nurt.bt.uk> wrote: >>> >>>> Assuming >>>> generously a one-penny average marginal cost per download >>> [says I'm a liar] >> No, you are. >> >>> It assumes that the cost of developing the software >> is amortized over a very large number of eventual downloaders. > > [says I'm a liar] No, you are. This is getting very tiresome. If you have run out of rational arguments and all you have left are ad hominems in your ammo, maybe it's time you quit? >>> But those costs are clearly non-zero, and they have to be >>> recouped somehow if the business is to make even the 5% profit margin >>> you so "generously" allow them. How do you propose they do that? >> Honest web businesses find something genuinely scarce to sell, perhaps >> put ads on their web pages to cover server related costs, and do not >> make obscene profits in the thousands of percent or more. > > [says I'm a liar] No, you are.
From: Dave Searles on 11 Oct 2009 12:30 Espen Vestre wrote: > Dave Searles <searles(a)hoombah.nurt.bt.uk> writes: > >>> It assumes that the cost of developing the software >> is amortized over a very large number of eventual downloaders. > >> Honest web businesses find something genuinely scarce to sell, perhaps >> put ads on their web pages to cover server related costs, and do not >> make obscene profits in the thousands of percent or more. > > [personal attack deleted] Wrong.
From: Dave Searles on 11 Oct 2009 12:30 Espen Vestre wrote: > Espen Vestre <espen(a)vestre.net> writes: >> [personal attack deleted] > [personal attack deleted] Wrong.
From: Dave Searles on 11 Oct 2009 12:34 Joost Kremers wrote: > Kaz Kylheku wrote: >> The point is, don't use your fucked up country's laws in discussions >> about what is right. > > You seem to be forgetting that copyright law is also a law. You seem to claim > that the rights that copyright law provides for creators and consumers form a > *moral* basis, but it's just a law. > > But ok, let's discuss this from the point of right and wrong. I personally feel > that someone who develops a creative work, whether literature, music, or a piece > of software, has the moral right to decide how others use their work. And I personally feel that they don't.
From: Dave Searles on 11 Oct 2009 12:36
Raffael Cavallaro wrote: > On 2009-10-10 21:01:01 -0400, Kaz Kylheku <kkylheku(a)gmail.com> said: >> In nearly every posting I have made in this thread, I made a clear >> distinction between doing something with the work (manipulating >> bits on your machine) and redistribution (making copies for other, >> broadcasting, etc). > > I understand that *you* belive this distinction to be crucial, but the > law does not. > > Specifically, courts have held that licenses *can* restrict in what way > you may manipulate the bits on your machine when it involves using a > work of which you are not the copyright holder. Read these again. http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090927/2332506333.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091001/1805496397.shtml |