Re: [mmox] mmox Digest, Vol 1, Issue 113

"dyerbrookme@juno.com" <dyerbrookme@juno.com> Mon, 23 February 2009 19:41 UTC

Return-Path: <dyerbrookme@juno.com>
X-Original-To: mmox@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mmox@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81BB53A6A26 for <mmox@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 Feb 2009 11:41:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.422
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.422 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.176, BAYES_00=-2.599, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UGuoohh0lRsB for <mmox@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 Feb 2009 11:41:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from outbound-mail.vgs.untd.com (outbound-mail.vgs.untd.com [64.136.55.15]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id A9EC73A69DF for <mmox@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 Feb 2009 11:41:49 -0800 (PST)
X-UOL-TAGLINE: true
Received: from outbound-bu1.vgs.untd.com (webmail03.vgs.untd.com [10.181.12.143]) by smtpout02.vgs.untd.com with SMTP id AABE4F88ZACPAETJ for <mmox@ietf.org> (sender <dyerbrookme@juno.com>); Mon, 23 Feb 2009 11:41:11 -0800 (PST)
X-UNTD-OriginStamp: ireJTaFtV8IZgEqY8qAucSk4DgBsdYkNyFTuE/Jz1/SNdq7I6xByRg==
Received: (from dyerbrookme@juno.com) by webmail03.vgs.untd.com (jqueuemail) id N94ZJHV5; Mon, 23 Feb 2009 11:40:59 PST
Received: from [68.161.198.3] by webmail03.vgs.untd.com with HTTP: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 19:40:52 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [68.161.198.3]
Mime-Version: 1.0
From: "dyerbrookme@juno.com" <dyerbrookme@juno.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 19:40:52 +0000
To: gareth@litesim.com
X-Mailer: Webmail Version 4.0
Message-Id: <20090223.144052.24438.3@webmail03.vgs.untd.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
X-ContentStamp: 2:2:1827591717
X-MAIL-INFO: 5d83ba77ba877ecf87ef3377ef072a9f6e8ffeb3472ae31b2f1f43ab23a74bdb03fbba3ecf4a5abb5a87
X-UNTD-Peer-Info: 10.181.12.143|webmail03.vgs.untd.com|outbound-bu1.vgs.untd.com|dyerbrookme@juno.com
Cc: mmox@ietf.org, dyerbrookme@juno.com
Subject: Re: [mmox] mmox Digest, Vol 1, Issue 113
X-BeenThere: mmox@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Massively Multi-participant Online Games and Applications <mmox.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmox>, <mailto:mmox-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mmox>
List-Post: <mailto:mmox@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mmox-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmox>, <mailto:mmox-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 19:41:50 -0000

Debating various economic systems and business models wouldn't fall into the  purview of this list if it weren't for the very pertinent fact that interoperability precludes or allows forms of economic systems by affirming or denying intellectual property rights in the code. 

Then the unspoken or espoused economic views of the coders matters a great deal. If they all adhere to the copyleftist mode and claim that inserting c/m/t "breaks their business model" (although I don't see that it does, as they can check off "yes" to c/m/t), and they impose that as they only choice articulated in the tools that emerge from the code, then they've foreclosed a Metaverse economy based on IP and micropayments.

Or, not to limit ourselves to virtual worlds because interoperability connects not only to VW platforms, let's take a story of how someone really makes a living in the real world of real proprietary code who is not an anecdote, but typical of a software business:
http://tech.yahoo.com/blogs/null/124073

Whatever the jailbreaks and rips, the i-phone is based on proprietary code. It admit various apps and those apps, too, are proprietary in many cases. This fellow gives away free games, but they are merely loss-leaders to get customers to buy the closed-code game which is sold by the i-phone as closed close. So the interoperability that enabled all the widgets or apps or whatever is still based on a proprietary code concept for both the technology vendor and the user. If those who believed there should be no proprietary closed code prevailed on the production of the i-phone and its app economy for thousands of developers, there'd be no mobile app economy, now would there. That's because the option did not get foreclosed in development.

If there's something I haven't understood about how i-phone and apps work, enlighten me, but I think the analogy is sound.

____________________________________________________________
Click to compare and save on auto insurance.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/BLSrjpTImHYq375zTIrqcaFxHEq6W3NklESf7wPUL6Ue0CUnNJLMI3dUHvy/