I think your conception of how open source / free software programmers are motivated isn’t accurate, actually. Many of them see what they do as a form of expression (and some, in fact, have explicitly argued that in court, as part of free speech cases). I know I certainly feel that way about it, and I’ve been making a living as a free software programmer for more than a decade.

I’ve never heard a programmer (unless you are one) espouse the position you describe, re science/math vs engineering.

One of the points I’m trying to make in the article is that the mere fact of being “the artist” shouldn’t automatically entitle someone to make decisions about who can copy what. Some artists may be in favor of sharing and some may not; but just because someone asks for a monopoly doesn’t mean it makes sense to give it to them. When *you* share something with your friend, or *you* make a translation of a text that you have your own copy of, why should some third party have the right to tell you you can’t do that?

Finally, re advertisers: I’m not as pessimistic as you are , but if you are right, then that’s an argument against copyright restrictions anyway. After all, advertising is a non-copyright model — i.e., broadcast television doesn’t make its money from royalties.

comparing creative works with free software is not right. The open source movement is about computer science being recognised as a “science” not engineering. Programmers see it as sort of like mathematics. Hence programmers see it as insane that a mathematical solution i.e. Software, should be sold! programming is a logical solution for a problem. mathematicians don’t sell their solutions for whatever equation why should programmers?

But creative works are by no means a science or math. They should be sold for a price. yes things could be better and we could share freely, but what about those vocal artist who are not keen on any of this free sharing? i am not talking about the rich ones.

in the end, where money is concerned. there’ll always be a gatekeeper. even now as the digital revolution is sinking in, gatekeepers are organising themselves: advertisers. they will decide what gets money and what doesn’t. not because they are dumb gatekeepers, no, because the majority of people don’t care about great art/ideas.

Write a great book with breathtaking ideas. if the majority of people won’t find it interesting, we don’t publish. decide to give away your book for free and then few people will actually read it. marority rules.