So are open source advocates also against proprietary music,

https://onpon4.github.io/other/gaming-trap/

File: 1467887259676.jpg (830KB, 2480x3113px) Image search: [Google]

830KB, 2480x3113px

>>60253180
We only care about software

>>60253230
How are video games not a software

>>60253180
You don't understand at all.
Open Source exists because of copyright laws and is similarly protected by them.
In fact the fact that it grants additional rights instead of adding more restrictions makes it even stronger.

If people want to be paid for their work, and some degree of control over it I can respect that.
I just also expect them to respect the open licences that grant people additional Freedoms.
If they don't then they can face the very restrictions they've lobbied for.

>>60253251
>Open Source
>grants additional rights

File: 6080736879_4cfa80b26c_b.jpg (280KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

280KB, 1024x683px

>>60253282
>>60253251
forgot pic

>>60253180

>His would the creative output of these industries be affected by lack of IP laws?

if you like an artist, pay them yourself, easy as that

don't get my taxdollars involved sending people to jail so Paul McCartney can afford his 5th yacht

>>60253241
read
>So are open source advocates also against proprietary music, movies, books, video games, etc.?

>>60253180
Almost everyone in the open source scene agrees art can be monetized and such and doesn't really have "freedoms" like software.

This comes in with video games where almost everything like the engine of the game is open sourced while the art assets are proprietary and copyrighted (see: Quake 1 through 4).

People who campaign for every thing to not have copyright are part of Open Culture and whatnot.

>>60253282
Versus traditional copyright law and typical content licenses yes.

Its part of why the GPL is so strong legally. If break the terms of the license and try to use the code in ways that wouldn't normally be allowed by copyright you're fucked.

>>60253348
All free software is open source but not all open source software is free.

Get learned and stop using the terms interchangeably. https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.en.html

Thanks,
Free software lovers of /g/

>>60253348
Has never been fought in court and even free software shills have admitted they'd lose if it was. Free software movement is nothing more than an honour system for dirty hippies.

>>60253230
That doesn't seem like a very principled ethical stance, it sounds like open sourcetards just heard someone say software should be free and took it as gospel.

>>60253375
I've used it correctly.

An open source license like BSD also grants additional rights compared to a typical copyright and is therefore a strong license for the same reasons.

It just has less of a chance of being enforced vs a true Free Software license against anything but the kind of grand idiocy seen in the AT&T situation.

>>60253410
>Has never been fought in court
Because the license is strong and nobody has been dumb enough to not settle out of court before it came to that.

>free software shills
>nothing more than an honour system for dirty hippies

So which is it, are we shills for big companies built on Free Software like RedHat and Google?
Or are we dirty hippies who don't understand the law and business?

>>60253180
I'm pretty sure Stallman has endorsed Creative Commons and Copyleft for non software based assets in video games and such.

>>60253180
Art should be the artist's property.
Software is a tool. Imagine not being able to use, modify and share the tool you bought just because the manufacturer said so.

>>60253888
I don't have to imagine, have you looked into the situation with John Deere at all?

>>60253414
>that sweet denial
Oh boy. And there are the rest of /g/ wondering how many times Intel spied on their system

>>60253888
IP is not real property as it doesn't suffer from scarcity.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rkk9jFl_KZI