Make the world a better place (Public License)

 Recently, issues of licensing have been increasingly discussed, probably due to the closure of certain resources and bewilderment about how to live on.

 First, it must be recognized that the GPL and other licenses exist, and although they are not a legal norm, nevertheless declare certain moments of interaction between people, in particular, identify authors and consumers of intellectual labor. And when the author is not liable for damage, often the framework for using the program for unlawful purposes is often not defined.
… the code
 It is unlikely that someone can make people not violate the rights of other members of society, yet it must be remembered that our country has joined the WTO and some of the international rules are already spreading on the domestic market and this is a reality to be reckoned with. The legal aspect of a citizen’s actions can already be considered in the context of international relations - therefore, new restrictions and rules are introduced.

 At first I thought to write a charter of pro-programmers, then I decided that no one needed it, because no one would read it. I recently mastered the text of 3 more open licenses OAL, EFML, Free Artist - I did not find one point in all - a ban on use for personal enrichment and a ban on use for violating the law of a country of residence, country of residence or violation of international standards defaming the author.
Many people say that they are free to do what they want, but that alone should not violate the freedom of other people to do the same, and that is why jurisprudence and law as such arise.
 Some propose not to prohibit, but rather fully disclose and even legalize - Legalize-it! - I will say no, it’s impossible, because if someone originally violated someone else’s rights, then such content cannot be offered in any form. Since this is an economic mechanism (trigger) for other participants - in fact, it is dumping and this technique is prohibited in the economy, since it can cause an imbalance in relations with other market participants, and this way, the price to exit and protect the product becomes several times higher than the product itself. Because it is necessary to protect - it is necessary to develop technologies - it is necessary to introduce a verification server - it is necessary to maintain lawyers - it is necessary to maintain personnel for those support - all this increases the price of the final product and this is understandable.

 If, say, programmers do not bear any responsibility, do not provide any support, do not continue the development of the product, then in the absence of source codes and their resolution, it makes no sense to try to distribute this product because it is a dead end branch, because you have to write crutches or rewrite everything again. And if the development is ongoing and the license is closed, then there is no point in violating the established rules, because otherwise the development will stop. Take allods - users did not pay enough for the product to develop, they merged it and turned on such a donation that only those who pay began to play - a good product went for a penny.
 Someone says that prices are not fair or there are no supplies, there is no Russification - but the very legal aspects and the Russification itself actually cost some money, according to the legislation it was generally impossible to sell products without a Russian name or without translation. To make a high-quality translation is worth certain labor costs, it often costs more to protect the rights of authors and producers.

 Therefore (I know that I am odious for many) I thought of a few rules, they should be simple and clear, such as CC-by-NC-SA.

  1. If the author has indicated a license, then you are accustomed to read and observe it, regardless of your knowledge of the original language of the license, if you do not know how to read, do not use it.
  2. Do not use the products for purposes unauthorized by the author or the law.
  3. The presumption of innocence works only for respectable citizens, therefore it is necessary to answer for violations, and it is better not to violate.
  4. Respect for the contribution of other people to the development of mankind.
  5. Freedom of use, as well as freedom of speech, means acceptance of the rules and obligations established by the author (or society).

 Someone will say that intellectual work and products cannot have a high price and therefore you do not need to pay the author for each copy every time.
 The brain is not a boobs if it does not harden for a long time. The costs of intellectual work actually include not only the development of the individual and his contribution to his own intellectual development, but also the entire informational development of mankind and all the energy consumed, since the multifactor system of influencing the consciousness of people is far from being as simple as nailing and even the invention of the wheel carries weight, not to mention the differences in language and alphabet.
 Here, an interesting option was suggested recently - to redeem rights from authors at the state level. After all, the state is the very society that needs progress and informatization, in the case of books - there are public libraries, patents must also appear somewhere. The GPL is a public license and generally does not need a patent, since the code is immediately available, but I would include paragraph 2, as well as determine the payment methods for public licenses by states and the prohibition on acquiring public rights by companies so as not to it turned out as happened with mysql.

 The economic basis may be the issuance of shares (certificates, licenses) for a particular product issued by an open fund, which could distribute state subsidies and stimulate the development of authors not only in programming, but also in culture, maybe chemistry, physics - now there are company funds and government, but how much do they support? 2-3 percent.
 With closed sources and programs, there are generally incubators, venture funds, entering into which there is immediately a certain responsibility, each has its own policy including monetization, interest, development conditions, licenses and jurisdictions, now interesting moments are happening in contact eg.
But after all, the servers of many companies use open source software and few of them disclose the source code for the community, just as few writers publish all the books and articles they have read - and this is stated in gpl, which must specify the authors and the software used.
 From here one can propose the creation of a page with “thanks” and a full description of all the materials used and open products, while for purchased licensed products this can be omitted. That is, if I now write in emax under Linux from dew, then I can and in general should say this, but in general I should have such a page in my profile, and I personally can not indicate part of the information, since I participated in debag, that is, I have my personal contribution. - this is to paragraph 4.

 according to paragraph 5, everything is simple - do not violate and you will not be judged. in the information society - time and place can be more valuable than the information itself, so the price of certain products can correspond to the time that increases due to its use - the development of mankind very seriously depends on it, so that decisions are not only correct, but also at least in time, however, violations of some rules can lead to violations in others, and the price of accelerating development will result in unexpected situations, because, say, quantum uncertainty is violated.
 you cannot steal as well as kill, because one is likely to lead to another - this is a simple connection that needs to be realized.
When someone illegally takes one product and does not use another, then let’s say in our open fund it turns out that some product doesn’t get votes and its authors don’t get anything, although their product was intended for a specific audience initially ...
 These connections seem suspicious, but in our world everything is not at all chaotic and one of the roles of a person is to streamline, be aware of his actions, comprehend the rules that are already inherent in nature, since breaking them will lead to certain consequences, as well as in society people are quite interconnected and perform certain roles when someone is not fulfilling its role, there is a certain imbalance, provoking changes.

 Those rare copies of books and programs that are very necessary for individual individuals should in fact fall into the general storage fund with the consent of the authors or copyright holders and as a whole has already been defined by law, as the terms of copyright for certain intellectual property products, it is possible to provide legislatively the terms of rights for digital products, it may be necessary to distinguish between art and consumer products, introduce categories for media products, regulation in scientific research may be one of the leading ravovyh resources in this area. But in general, I am in favor of moving away from analogues, since this is not an analog world, then in general, of course, you need to use the rules of quantum physics. ' )

output from comments:

if the author does not want to, then he can prohibit illegal actions through his materials, because First of all, you must take care of the society in which you are located, that is, do not harm your actions, just like with the GPL you must inherit all the existing rules for the product being developed, and if there is a conflict of interest in the field of freedom of expression, etc., then in all respects, the civil code will prevail, if not uk, and first of all it will threaten the author, as the actual developer of the product or system, and if there was no conscious motive, then the author should not be responsible for the actions of someone, if he does not support this position and society itself does not support violations of established norms.
that is, being in a social environment - you must comply with the rules established by law and the moral is as follows:
before the law, everyone is equal and the law is one for all.

the principles of freedom of speech generally do not imply a violation of the rights and freedoms of other citizens, and moreover, they do not allow insulting, perjurying or otherwise violating the laws of the state - this is the essence of the amendment, on refusing to promote actions that violate laws.

You must realize your responsibility and your neighbors for your actions as a young Padawan.

Also popular now: