<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: RMS at Rice</title>
	<atom:link href="http://paxasiana.com/arc/2008/08/29/rms-at-rice/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://paxasiana.com/arc/2008/08/29/rms-at-rice/</link>
	<description>International Departures</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 18:37:15 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Dustin</title>
		<link>http://paxasiana.com/arc/2008/08/29/rms-at-rice/comment-page-1/#comment-37022</link>
		<dc:creator>Dustin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Aug 2008 18:44:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://paxasiana.com/arc/2008/08/29/rms-at-rice/#comment-37022</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;ZOMGRMSWTFBBQ!&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;I fully agree - the right to produce closed-source software is perfectly legal and should be protected as such. However, I believe it is the responsibility of the distributor to invent/invest in secure methods of making their customers pay, instead of using scare and harassment tactics to discourage users from taking advantage of an easy-to-abuse distribution scheme.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Lessig ftw =D&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>ZOMGRMSWTFBBQ!</p>

<p>I fully agree - the right to produce closed-source software is perfectly legal and should be protected as such. However, I believe it is the responsibility of the distributor to invent/invest in secure methods of making their customers pay, instead of using scare and harassment tactics to discourage users from taking advantage of an easy-to-abuse distribution scheme.</p>

<p>Lessig ftw =D</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joseph Simmons</title>
		<link>http://paxasiana.com/arc/2008/08/29/rms-at-rice/comment-page-1/#comment-37020</link>
		<dc:creator>Joseph Simmons</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Aug 2008 16:51:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://paxasiana.com/arc/2008/08/29/rms-at-rice/#comment-37020</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Regarding games; even if the code to the software was made free, there's no reason the rest of the game (plot, artwork, level design, unit design including stats, etc) could not be proprietary. In fact, this seems to me rather ideal; all the different game developers get to share technological advancements in coding, rather than having to duplicate each other's work all the time, and anyone who wants to can try to write their own game without having to code it all themselves, but the actual game isn't free.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;And of course you would also have some games that were free, like the Battle for Wesnoth (www.wesnoth.org . :P&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Regarding games; even if the code to the software was made free, there&#8217;s no reason the rest of the game (plot, artwork, level design, unit design including stats, etc) could not be proprietary. In fact, this seems to me rather ideal; all the different game developers get to share technological advancements in coding, rather than having to duplicate each other&#8217;s work all the time, and anyone who wants to can try to write their own game without having to code it all themselves, but the actual game isn&#8217;t free.</p>

<p>And of course you would also have some games that were free, like the Battle for Wesnoth (www.wesnoth.org . :P</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.203 seconds -->
