More on Protecting Source Code
oren-py-l at hishome.net
Tue Sep 17 08:24:12 CEST 2002
On Mon, Sep 16, 2002 at 08:26:06PM -0700, David LeBlanc wrote:
> I have read what I consider to be the narrow minded and short sighted
> views wrt to protecting IP in the form of Python source code, and I
> would like to make a few points.
Yes, there are narrow-minded people on both sides of the intellectual
> * Not everyone believes that all or most software ought to be free. I
> for one, don't.
I don't think that software 'ought' to be this or 'ought' to be that. In
other words, I believe in freedom.
> * Owners of property have the right to control it. If you disagree and
> own a nice car or house, I'll be right over :->
I don't think anyone would disagree with that. The disagreement seems to
be whether information is property or not. By its nature it isn't but it
can be made more property-like by laws that restrict people's freedom to
What I find funny is what people consider to be their 'rights'.
You have the right not to use Python if it doesn't meet your requirements
for obscuring your source code. You also have the right to modify Python
to suit your needs because the copyright owners of Python have chosen to
give you a license to do it. And you also have the right to hire someone
to do it for you.
The state has given you the 'right' to use the power of its court and
police to forcibly restrict people that use information you have created
in violation of copy-restriction laws.
But that is not enough for you. You also want the 'right' to complain about
something that was given to you freely and expect that righteous rants
about your view of intellectual property laws will somehow compel people
to modify it to your specification without compensation.
More information about the Python-list