NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Majoru Oakheart" data-source="post: 4684473" data-attributes="member: 5143">I don't think that the WORK is less valuable, just the resulting product.  The thing about hardware vs software is that if you pay a guy in a factory X dollars to build a piece of hardware, and Y dollars on the raw materials to build the item, then it costs Z(which is the total of X and Y) dollars to make a second item exactly the same.On the other hand, that device had to be researched by someone, that research and design is certainly worthwhile.  Without it, there would be no hardware.  Someone had to write the software that makes the hardware work, that work is worthwhile and should be rewarded.But what I'm saying is that the resulting hardware only has a value of Z, not Z plus whatever it cost to code the software that goes with it.  Because the software can be duplicated infinite times for free.  Nor do you add the hardware design costs to the resulting item either.  You don't need to redesign it each time you produce one.When you produce an item like this, you hope to make enough profit to recoup the costs of design and code and still make more profit.  However, I disagree with the philosophy that says that the resulting object has a value equal to all the design costs and programming costs.  It doesn't.I agree with some other people here who say that the solution to the problem is to reduce the time dramatically that Copyright can be held.  I'd support something akin to 5 or 10 years.  Companies would be able to produce a product, make profit for a couple of years then make something new.</blockquote>

Verification