Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!gatech!ncar!noao!mcdsun!mcdchg!clyde!watmath!looking!brad
From: brad@looking.UUCP (Brad Templeton)
Newsgroups: comp.misc
Subject: Re: lotus chairman makes 26 million
Message-ID: <1606@looking.UUCP>
Date: 4 May 88 16:38:14 GMT
References: <380@motbos.UUCP> <9160@cisunx.UUCP> <11334@mimsy.UUCP>
Reply-To: brad@looking.UUCP (Brad Templeton)
Organization: Looking Glass Software Ltd.
Lines: 24

You bet it was immoral for you to duplicated that BMW, and also illegal.

In using your matter duplicator, you became a car manufacturer.  The
duplicator is not important.  You could make an exact duplicate of a BMW
with conventional methods (BMW does it all the time).

Aside from the obvious fact that you would have to rip the BMW logos,
nameplates, insignia and serial numbers off your duplicated car, or be
guilty of fraud, I think it would not be proper of you to duplicate all
the artistic and aesthetic elements of the car without paying the creators
of those elements.

Plus, there had better not be any patented parts in the automobile, including
things patented by people who simply licenced the patents to BMW.
(Isn't that British Motor Works? :-) )

Fact is that the design and engineering of a car, particularly a fancy car,
is a considerable creative effort.  Just like writing a piece of software.
It is immoral to misappropriate somebody else's creative efforts against
their will.

Why is that hard to understand?
-- 
Brad Templeton, Looking Glass Software Ltd. - Waterloo, Ontario 519/884-7473