Right. So you have the option to go for free software. And that's great, I'm all up for it.
But it's actually the same thing. The software creator gets to choose how you use the software. It's their right.
I think if you take away strong copyright, it will be replaced by DRM and legally binding license fees for even trivial things like books. And I think, to some extent, fair enough. I think if you make something, you can freely choose what terms people get it on - and they can always refuse.
If anything, copyright is more permissive than the alternative.
No, the whole point of TFA is that it is not their right to choose to restrict how others want to use their work. In fact, it is unethical, and so simply having the option to use FOSS is not enough. It is, at most, an economic incentive.
In a post-copyright world, DRM will be legal to break, and such licenses will be unenforceable. If producers try to restrict us, we can and will simply ignore them. Because it is not their right.
But it's actually the same thing. The software creator gets to choose how you use the software. It's their right.
I think if you take away strong copyright, it will be replaced by DRM and legally binding license fees for even trivial things like books. And I think, to some extent, fair enough. I think if you make something, you can freely choose what terms people get it on - and they can always refuse.
If anything, copyright is more permissive than the alternative.