Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv: July 2000:
[Freeciv] Re: forced open source

[Freeciv] Re: forced open source

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: Brandon Van Every <vanevery@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: freeciv@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv] Re: forced open source
From: Tobias Brox <tobiasb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2000 03:26:59 +0200 (MET DST)

> Yes, this is basic Capitalism and private property vs. Marxism and the
> abolishment of private property.

Actually I disagree.  I think Eric Raymond has said that anyone supporting
free software must be a libetarian.  Copyright and patent laws are
artificial restrictions made by the State.

In a capitalist system, you and your neighbour might have two properties
of different size.  You're thirsty and wondering how to get water.
Suddently the neighbour digs a well, and you see that he actually gets
clean water from it.  In a capitalist system, there should be absolutely
nothing stopping you from digging your own well at your own property.
You are free to choose what to spend your resources at, it's your property
that you can do whatever you want with, and you have equal rights as the
neighbour to the ground water.

In a true communistic system, you shouldn't bother with the well.  The
State should understand that you're thirsty, and it should eventually
build a big well that both you and your neighbour could use.  And if your
neighbour built a well, it's your right to take water from it - after all
you need it for living, and the water belongs to the population at large.

In your system, the neighbour would stop you at once when you started
building the well, "you can't do this, this was my idea!  you have no
rights for stealing my idea!  you have to buy expensive water here, or
find yourself another way of getting water!".  That's neither
true capitalism nor true communism.

> Very insightful as to the historical problems of capital.  Brain-dead as
> to the solutions.  As far as I'm concerned, people are entitled to own
> and control the means of production.  Intervention and regulation of
> ownership is only justified when someone is being harmed.

If people aren't allowed to do what they want (i.e. to develop and play
an improved version of civ at better computers), they are indeed getting

Spell checkers are for wimps
(please send feedback on all typos)

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]