> The whole point of the argument here is that the current system is outdated, and there's nothing intrinsically right about it, as you keep implying
I never said it was, nor did I imply it. I'm arguing reality: we live in a capitalist-based system, and therefore we must work within that framework. You want IP for free? Okay, but first make everything else free too.
People who produce IP for a living want to be compensated for their work. Why? Because they want to be able to afford a house, car, and other things, that cost money.
> Claiming it is wrong that those authors don't get paid is just an arbitary choice of ethics.
Let's all start stealing from the store. It's obviously an arbitrary choice of ethics.
If a person makes software, and releases it with the stipulation that they be paid for it, then either you pay for it, or you don't use it. If I build a freeway, I want to be paid for its use. Don't want to pay? Take a different road.
People keep saying government should fuck off and private industry should do everything, but if they don't get any fruits for their labour, why should they bother? This is the way things are now, not some pie in the sky fantasy.
> But just to clear things up, could you specify if it's wrong that software authors don't get paid because:
I don't agree with any of them, but I'm closest to 2). Let me rephrase it a little:
They have a moral right to get paid for work they perform if others use the results of their labour.