RE: Economics and the GPL

> Patrik Stridvall wrote:
> 
> >>except that you are not allowed to withdraw the 
> >>freedom you enjoy from others.
> >>
> >
> >If a modify a GPL:ed work the right to use the ORGINAL work 
> is not withdrawn
> >from other people, so what you say is pure nonsence.
> >
> >Note that the freedom to take my work is not one of the 
> granted freedoms
> >because of copyright law, so I'm a little unsure that 
> freedom your are
> >refering to.
> >
> 
> There is no "taking" of work.  You can modify GPLd code all 
> you want and 
> not distribute the source code. 

True.

> You are just not allowed to 
> distribute 
> the binaries, either.  But that's fine, because the binaries are 
> partially based on source code written by someone other than you, and 
> they should have the right to determine how their work is to be 
> distributed too, don't you think?

If I distribute the binaries or the orginal work or part of it, yes.

However there is no need to do that. The end user can download the
orignal work himself and apply my modifications (or additions).

Note that my work isn't nessarily a derived work of the orginal work
just because I use the orginal work somehow.

The whole point is that what is a derived work and what is not,
is unclear. However, because of the fact that copyright only
protects unique expression and not facts, idea, methods etc, 
I have good reason to believe that it is likely be quite unlikely
that my work was indeed a derived work, especially if I'm a little
careful when writing it.

In short, if 
1. I don't distribute the original work
2. My work is not a legally derived work of the original work
I can distribute MY work under whatever license I wish.

> If *I* write some source code, do I or do I not get to 
> determine how my 
> source code is used?  If I decide I do not want it to be used in 
> commercial software, isn't that my choice?  If I choose to put 
> restrictions on the use of my source code, is it not my right?

How to distribute, yes.

How to use, no. Anyway, the GPL explictly doesn't regulate use so
that is irrelevant as far as the GPL is concerned.
 
> If you wish the right to determine how *your* source code is 
> to be used, 
> I feel it is your responsiblity to allow others the same 
> right.  If they 
> decide they do not want their code in a product of which the 
> source code 
> is unavailable, it should their right.

I have no problem at all on how my code is used.
Nuclear research, animal testing, whatever.

However, if I want to make a living I DO care if my work
is duplicated and distributed to others that might have paid me.
 
> This has nothing to do with the right of access, but the 
> right of use. 
>  Just as a novelist will not allow their work to be used in another's 
> novel (though it does not affect access to the original work), source 
> code authors should have the right to determine how their 
> code is used.

No and copyright disagrees with you here. First sale says that you
no say in what happends to your work after you have sold it for example.

In short:
Copyright primarily regulates distribution. Not use.