[LINK] Fwd: Microsoft learns some tricks from Open Source Software

[Deus Ex Machina]

rchirgwin at ozemail.com.au [rchirgwin at ozemail.com.au] wrote:
> >you never seem to get anything right do you. its commons that require
> >removal of freedom, not markets.
> 
> Sorry, but that one can't just go through to the keeper.
> 
> "New forms of property" represent a curtailment of freedoms. Patents are a
> curtailment of freedom. We can argue about the morality of patents, or about
> the right duration of the patent, or legitimate content of patents, but the
> fact remains that the patent removes or limits the freedom of the 
> non-holder.
> 
> All forms of government and all forms of law demand that the individual 
> curtail some freedoms.

correct. however certain forms of curtailment generate far more new value
then they curtail. forms of property like land title and IP have generated
far more value then they limit. one has to be carefull not to get caught up in godelian
traps regarding defining freedoms and rights.

note though this is in fact ibms arguement for supporting open source.  the value
surrendered in reducing the price to zero is greatly exceeded by the spin off
business it creates for them. there is an article in fortune magazine
about ibm strategy with FLOSS, its worth a read. be aware though that
ibms model is not to make money supporting FLOSS. it might a make a tiny
bit in that regard, but its primary business model is professional services. 

Vic