From: Adam Flinton 

Geo. wrote:
> "Adam Flinton"  wrote in message
> news:3ed081b1{at}w3.nls.net...
>
>
>>So would you then also look at forcing dominant app vendors (e.g.
>>AutoCAD) to drop their prices etc as well or simply to port onto other
>>OS'es or both?
>
>
> Adam, If I ruled the world the software market would work like this:
>
> Because in the digital world things tend to gravitate towards monopoly, I
> would promote monopoly as legal and desirable and force competition with a
> simple rule to be enforced any time a product gained over 50% market share.
> That rule would be the product must permit complete competition or we pull
> the copyright and it becomes public domain. You may have monopoly but not
> control.
>
> In the case of AutoCAD or Word or Excel, that means they would have to
> publish their file format and allow anyone else to use it as it is by
> definition the standard format at that point. Changing the format would
> require a public filing of the new format a year in advance so everyone
> could be using it when they release it.
>
> In the case of OS, all communications formats, all file systems, all API's,
> all security formats, anything that you need to know to create a program,
> repair utility, or a competing OS that is compatible with it would have the
> same requirements, fully published, free, and full notification of any
> changes a year in advance.
>
> In order to get a copyright on software, a full and complete copy of all
> source code and compilers would need to be filed with LoC on permanent media
> (read that as CD/DVD not tape) for any versions, updates, patches, etc. Any
> attempts to stop competition by creating incompatibilities would result in
> loss of copyright and release of all source code to public domain, no other
> penalty would be needed.
>

Yeah but Rich & his lobbying minions would just accuse the gov/ people
in general of "copyright theft" or possibly even "copyright
child abuse"

> I believe this would serve the public interest with a minimal of limitations
> on people who make a living writing software. They could decide the future
> of their product but they would be forced to maintain market share via good
> healthy competition.
>


Again though...public interest vs private "capital" inc
"Intellectual capital" would mean that those with money to lose
from this arrangement would pay to ensure it doesn't happen.

"We lose money you lose campaign contributions...."


Adam

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-4