To the mods : I'm sorry, I meant to post this in this non-*nix forum but posted it here by mistake. Please move the thread. I apologize.


I was just wondering. Is there anyone here who uses linux because they don't support Intellectual Property Rights?

It kind of bothers me that all/most opensource supporters are thought of as socialists. I'm migrating to linux just because I'm a libertarian and don't support IPR.
I was just wondering, is there anyone like me on this forum?

Also, if you do support copyrights and patents, then how can you hate Microsoft and Apple?

Don't exactly know what you're after here, or in your other threads, where you ask about if any 'girls' use Linux, and why more 'commies' use it, but you don't appear to have a good grasp of IPR, copyrights, and patents, if you ask questions like this.

People who use Linux do support intellectual property rights. People who use pirated software don't.

It's not like all or even most of them do that. Some do and some don't "support" (it's a little vague way to put it, isn't it?) such things. And I dare say not all people who use pirated software lack that attitude. There's more to it than just the "they're evil" -thing that some tout, without going into opinions about whether it's right or not.

In any given group as large as the userbase of Linux there's bound to be variation in every property that's based on the will or opinions of the people themselves. You will find all kinds of people among the users. And even if/when one supports copyrights, "intellectual property" (quoted, becaue I think it's a very bad term for the thing) and so on, one can hate single compenies like Microsoft, or even all of them. They do much more than just obey copyright laws. You can even be a Linux enthusiast but dislike the community, or the other way around, love the community but dislike the thing itself. Life's not all black and white.

I'd say if the only reason you use Linux is because you think you somehow vote against something (say "intellectual property rights"), then you're just teasing yourself for no reason. You could use your time better by studying for example the laws and ideologies behind the terms, then getting into the politics and changing things, if that's what is wanted. It's just like I'd drive a motorcycle just to say I hate cars, even though I didn't actually "do" anything with the motorcycle nor love it in any way. Weird.

It's not about supporting copyrights or whatever, it's about taking the rational and mature stance that there are rules in place and, accept them or not, they are there and we have to work within them while promoting a different way. It's not a political stance, necessarily, though it can be. It's about a different way.

I don't support software patents, but I do support copyrights. I do believe that you have to be reasonable about it however. Taping a football game and getting in trouble for it is completely ridiculous.
I can hate microsoft and apple for different reasons. I hate Microsoft because they make a very crappy system, and use immoral means to try and force their crap on everyone. I hate apple because their products are form over function, are too overpriced, and their users are usually completely in a state of braindead never-question-steve-jobs worship.

You don't support intellectual property rights? It's OK to use my work without permission (i'm a photographer)?

Well I didn't know about IP and software patents before using Linux. Furthermore, I am not a socialist, but Linux did influence my views. I do hate M$ and Apple and Google and the gubmint and Sauron. And why the hell not, they're all evil, and evil must be punished.

I think of anarchy as a little left of the left wing, a little right of the right wing, so if the eagle's wings wrap around, that would put it right behind the eagle's back, poised to plunge a dagger into its black heart.

If you won't support intellectual property rights, then I specifically forbid you to use any software that I have written or to which I have contributed.

I may not ask to get paid for doing the software, but regardless of that it is my creation and I own it. You may get to use it, modify it, or whatever else, but that is only because I agree to let you - and I require that you recognize my rights, even if that only means my name appears in the list of authors for whatever it is you produce from it.

If you won't recognize my rights, then I forbid you to use any of it.

And...a true Libertarian position most emphatically supports intellectual property rights.

I think there still is a difference between attribution and intellectual property, like there is a difference between the creative commons sharealike 3.0 and the M$ EULA. M$ claims that even your computer belongs to them if you use their software, creative commons only requires that you list the original author(s) if you modify and re-release your work (or the author can waive this right).

I don't make a lot of software, but I prefer the GPL v2, I don't even care if you attribute the work. Like anyone really reads those names in the credits file, much less has any clue as to the people with those names. There must be at least a million people named John Smith ... and if one of them puts their name on the software, will it really matter ?

Try saying that in the USA! You'll easily be on the side of Republicans who are conservatives, not the Democrats who are the liberals.

And BTW: Those British £ibertarian$ are really trying to make England like it was back in the 1800's: full of greed and oppression by corporate entities.

Edit: See this for an exact reason why I prefer to attack this post

British Libertarians are small in number. Their stated aims are, amongst others, a reduction in government and a reduction in the number of laws in place. their "Golden Rule" is that you can do what you like as long as you don't hurt anyone. Not a bad way to start writing a law book, really.

And in what universe are Democrats "liberals"? They are remarkably close to the Republicans. And another thing: this is an IP thread, not a politics thread. Can we all remember that please.

Well, I guess I just did say this in the USA, given that this is where I live and where I am currently located. And I most certainly dispute your characterization of my politics based upon that statement. It suggests that you are extremely naive.

You like to generalize a lot, don't you. You should get over that.

Everyone, can we please step back for a moment? The OP started this, along with other flame-bait/troll posts, and folks are falling for it.