So? You can have both.
Besides, most FOSS projects specify a license that forbids stealing the code and using it in ways to make profits while not contributing back or making the fork open themselves. These licenses protect the IP of the FOSS projects. There are countless lawsuits of FOSS projects against IP theft. Without IP, FOSS projects will have a hard time to justify their work.
Lightor@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Acting like FOSS is representing all creative work is dishonest.
stray@pawb.social 1 month ago
Why wouldn’t we buy his book? Is it bad?
absGeekNZ@lemmy.nz 1 month ago
Because Amazon stole it, made a copy available for 1/10 the price.
The marketing power of Amazon is 10’s of thousands of times greater than the original author, so you probably never hear that the book you are interested in has an author that is different from the one Amazon puts on the cover, who is a pen name of their “AI author”.
Note: I think IP law is a bit shit really, but removing any protection from creative works is dangerous, and extremely short sighted. If you don’t want to reward the corporations, learn to pirate…piracy is far more ethical than calling for the removal of IP law.
doodledup@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Amazon didn’t steal it. The author chose to sell it on the platform. The terms are very clear before engaging in the contract.
Also IP isn’t the problem here. IP doesn’t make Amazon act shitty.
SubArcticTundra@lemmy.ml 1 month ago
IP law definitely needs reform though