[pp.int.general] Why Free Software misses the point

[Edison Carter]

On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 6:50 PM, Fedor Khod'kov <fedor76 at istra.ru> wrote:
> Boris Turovskiy <tourovski at gmail.com> writes:
>> BTW, what seems to get lost when this theoretical debate started is
>> the fact that computer games are software, too, but in any definition
>> are functionally closer to movies or music than to "functional"
>> software.
> Dear Boris,
> If you want to ask how computer games fit into functional/non-functional
> division, the most straightforward way is to go and actually ask it.
> Your quoted comment is typical example of what is called "trolling".
> --

The quoted comment is an example of what I would call a 'perfectly valid point'

Games are software, but they have a log more in common with Music and
Movies than they do with Word processors, compilers, or Accounting
Packages.

So if we have separate copyright law for 'entertainment' and
'software', where do we classify computer games?