I think that if you understand how a complex thing works then you do in a sense "own" it. As an aside the whole concept of "ownership" in my view is being eroded by the high tax regime here, speaking as a libertarian. By that the I mean to ask do you really "own" a house if you need to continually pay land rates, water rates, and council rates or if you house if subject to arbitrary entry by government agents as is the case currently in Australia? Of course you could argue that "owning" constitutes certain rights such as the free entry into a property or the right to use a computing device in a certain specified manner. I'm sure the philosophy of ownership has been written about somewhere by someone. On 12/05/16 08:54, Rohan McLeod via luv-main wrote:
Gathered illuminati; seems to be a curious silence on the question who 'owns' Android; at the heart of an $A8billion dispute between Oracle and Google; which has re-surfaced this week -To what extent can open source software be 'owned' ? -To what extent can a particular distribution of a piece of open-source software be 'owned' ? -To what extent can API's be 'owned' ?
regards Rohan McLeod
_______________________________________________ luv-main mailing list luv-main@luv.asn.au https://lists.luv.asn.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/luv-main