[mythtv-users] A new theme on the way...

[Christopher Meredith]

On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 2:37 PM, Robert McNamara
<robert.mcnamara at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 12:25 PM, David Brodbeck <gull at gull.us> wrote:
>> Christopher Meredith wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 2:09 PM, Michael Lynch <lynchmv at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> /me takes the book, rewrites the end because I don't think the villain
>>>> should have died (despite it making the book awesome) and
>>>> redistributes the book, in a less than awesome state.
>>>
>>> That's a significantly different scenario than modifying free (as in
>>> beer) software for your own personal use. Nevertheless, I think that
>>> should be a viable option. Let the market decide what is awesome and
>>> what is not.
>>
>> The problem is an artist's reputation is on the line when their work is
>> distributed.  If someone makes something of theirs look lousy, then
>> distributes it, that artist's reputation is injured.  This is especially
>> problematic for visual artists and recording artists, where their original
>> style is usually identifiable even if the work has no attribution.
>>
>
> This sums it up rather succinctly.  I'm aware not everyone is
> artistically inclined, and to be quite honest, I don't even know that
> I would give myself that distinction.  What I *do* know is that I have
> poured a lot of genuine thought and care into Arclight, and I feel a
> real emotional attachment to it.  Arclight is *fun* to use in a way I
> haven't experienced before in Myth, and I take a certain gleeful joy
> in getting to use it at home.  I want everyone to experience it the
> way that I wrote it.  A *big* part of that is the look and feel, of
> which the font is an integral part.  To use a poor metaphor:
>
> We're friends.  You know that I have been working on my classic beater
> of a mustang and I've been fixing it up.  I finish work on it and I
> decide to give it to you. It's beautiful.  Perfect paint job, shiny
> rims, and a gorgeous interior. Before I hand the keys over, I pause
> and ask that you please, please promise me that you won't change
> anything on the car.  You agree that you won't, and we part ways.  You
> take the car home, park it in your garage, and decide that it would
> look a lot better with a hemi.  So you drop one in.  Can I stop you?
> No, I probably can't.  Did you break your agreement with me?  Yes, you
> did.  You were presented with a decision to accept the gift under
> certain conditions or, by knowing that you couldn't abide by them,
> declining it.
>
> The license isn't meant to be my means of reserving my right to
> enforcement-- It's meant to be an agreement between us, as friends,
> that you will honor my one wish in exchange for this thing.  If you
> are the kind of person who would feel no remorse for breaking a
> promise to a friend, knowing that he has poured a very personal part
> of himself into it, then that is something that you have to live with.
>  I'll be fine.  :)

Robert,

None of my interaction here is meant to be personal or particular to
you. I definitely understand though if you take it personally. I just
hope you don't equate my disagreement with you for disrespect of you.

That said, your analogy breaks down at the key place. What if we had
the Star Trekkian "replicator" technology and I was able to replicate
your Stang, then put a hemi in my copy? Such an act takes nothing away
form the work you put in or the finished product. You still have
yours, I have mine, what difference does it make?