> I think the biggest difference is that cars are physical objects which require nontrivial resources to produce
I disagree. Software, too, requires nontrivial resources to produce.
I guess what I'm arguing is that inherent value for both is in production / design. When you buy a vehicle, you're paying for the design, the function, etc..., not the physical materials. However, the object being purchased in the case of a vehicle must manifest itself through physical materials, and so the physical materials are the barrier for reproduction / distribution. This barrier forces payment towards the production / design.
In the software case, the barrier is artificially introduced by closing the source. This seems to be the way many force payment to the production / design of software. But naturally this cripples the users freedom.
I disagree. Software, too, requires nontrivial resources to produce.
I guess what I'm arguing is that inherent value for both is in production / design. When you buy a vehicle, you're paying for the design, the function, etc..., not the physical materials. However, the object being purchased in the case of a vehicle must manifest itself through physical materials, and so the physical materials are the barrier for reproduction / distribution. This barrier forces payment towards the production / design.
In the software case, the barrier is artificially introduced by closing the source. This seems to be the way many force payment to the production / design of software. But naturally this cripples the users freedom.