Google's sunshine profit - oh wait, typo, I meant prophet - has an op ed piece in the NY Times today about how fantastic the Google agreement is for readers. I'd post a link but it's such a self-serving piece of bs that I don't want anyone wasting their time reading it.
But if you do, here's my response:
If what Google has done is such a great idea, and so nobly motivated, then surely Segey Brin won't object if Google's code and data are used and redistributed, at profit, by others, without consultation or prior arrangement. If intellectual property laws are so out of date when they are applied to "old media," aren't they even more anachronistic when applied to new? Surely the world would be spectacularly better if all coding were open source as soon as it was written, and all of the physical representations of that coding, and the tangible and intangible results, wherever they might reside, were accessible to all, without limitation or cost. It would be a win-win for all.
Idealism in the employ of profit making is an old cliche.
The worst part of the agreement is that, if you're an individual author without a huge wad of cash, you basically had to sign on to the agreement to guarantee* any future control over your work.
So basically, I had to form a partnership with the SOB who robbed me. But at least I can sleep better with the knowledge that I'm doing it for all mankind.
*Ha!
No comments:
Post a Comment