[bingle]

Originally Posted by HarryT

But if people did not have that protection, most "creative" works would not exist, especially in fields like software writing. Most software is written as a commercial enterprise, not for the "good of society".

I disagree with your first statement - obviously, there was a time before copy protection, and obviously, works were created.

As far as your second statement goes, I think you misunderstand me. I'm not saying that people create for the good of society, but that it is in the interests of society to have people creating. A subtle distinction, but important - much like people don't spend money for the good of the economy, they do it for their own reasons. However, it's in the interest of the economy and society as a whole that people do spend money.

Originally Posted by HarryT

I am a professional software developer, and run my own business writing and selling software aimed at amateur astronomers. Copyright law is the only method whereby people like me are able to make a living. If anyone could legally duplicate and give away my software, I'd be out of a job, and my software would never have existed in the first place.

OK. Consider (WARNING, thought experiment!) a world in which you hadn't been able to stop your works from being copied. Either it was legal, or it was so prevalent that the legality didn't matter. What would your reaction be? You don't have the power to make it difficult to copy your work. Will you stop creating this work, and find another job? Will you find a way to be paid for it, despite the fact that it can be copied infinitely? Will you do it strictly for fun, and not worry about the monetary rewards? I don't know. It would be tragic if the response was to stop creating works - but I believe we're headed towards a world (or we're already there) where you do have to make that choice.

Originally Posted by HarryT

I strongly disagree with your suggestion that the "state" should pay me a salary to write software for the "good of society". That's not the way to encourage free enterprise. History shows that state-run businesses rarely prosper because they have no incentive to be innovative or profitable.

Well, maybe. It does have a lot of problems. But I point to things like the NEA and NSF in the US, which have a lot of success giving grants to artists and scientists. Or in the UK, you have the best example available, I think - the BBC. I'd trade almost any for-profit TV creator in the US for the BBC, even if it meant paying a TV tax. That's a prime example of how the government can fund creative works of very high quality.

Another, more germane to software, is the US military. They often fund basic engineering research and development, and they do it simply so that they can have the result. They don't care if the IP is owned by the government, they have a goal in mind and set out to solve it by giving grants and sponsoring contests.

To go back to my earlier analogy - the US Federal Reserve doesn't force people to spend money. But it implements policies that encourage people to spend money, for the good of the economy. Recently, the British government backed Northern Rock not because they're communist, but because a run on banks is bad for society.

Originally Posted by HarryT

Copyright law is absolutely essential if you want companies like mine to exist. No copyright protection = no creative works.

Please don't take this the wrong way, but maybe the world is changing in such a way that small, for-profit software houses can't exist any more. I hope not, really. But looking at the trend of software - Google, the most successful current software company is giving away almost every product they have. There's tons of open-source stuff out there, and people doing all sorts of other free tools and apps. You can run even a Windows PC without paying for any software besides the OS, these days.

I don't know how this problem will shake out, but I do think that holding on to the existing paradigm with both hands is just going to lead to sinking along with it, and doing damage to society in the form of unjust laws in the meantime.