You Can Oppose Copyright and Support Open Source

kfogel writes "I'm submitting 'Supporting Open Source While Opposing Copyright' as a response to Greg Bulmash's piece from yesterday. I think there were a number of flaws and mistaken assumptions in Bulmash's reasoning, and I've tried to address them in this rebuttal, which has undergone review from some colleagues in the copyright-reform community."

Abolishing copyright abolishes GPL

[Anonymous Coward]

Abolishing copyright abolishes the ability to enforce GPL. End of story. Even though the orignial article is flawed, the fact still remains. You can't control distribultion using the GPL without copyright law.

fix the article title, then

[SEAL]

"I'm submitting 'Supporting Open Source While Opposing Copyright' as a response to Greg Bulmash's piece from yesterday.

Then why not make the title of this article: "Supporting Open Source While Opposing Copyright", instead of repeating the same title from the previous article?

People who just scan titles, esp on RSS, are going to think this is a dupe.

Re:Not all open-source is the same

[wall0159]

Nonsense. You've just made the exact point that the article is refuting. In fact, you've made it completely without evidence. This is 'Insightful' how?

If you oppose copyright, but can't do anything about the existence of copyright, you can at least put stuff into the public domain without allowing someone to wrap it up in copyright and resell it. That's basically all the GPL does, and I don't see any conflict there at all.

Maybe if copyright was written differently, or not at all, we wouldn't have _need_ of the GPL, but that's a different story.