If R that Mr. A has is Resources for Mr. B, then R is a resource for Mr. A if Mr. A can understand it and transfer R.
Otherwise, Mr. A exists as nature and Mr. B collects natural resources from it.
concrete example
- Mr. A makes a picture and program R
- Suppose R is valuable to Mr. B.
- If Mr. A understands that R is valuable to Mr. B and controls the distribution of R, then R is a resource because he can act to get what he wants in exchange for giving R to Mr. B.
- On the other hand, if you release R, for example, under a license that anyone can take for free, you can’t “control distribution”.
- Therefore, B takes R on its own, and there is no binding obligation to demand a return for it.
- At least in the eyes of the law and capitalist ethics.
- Therefore, B takes R on its own, and there is no binding obligation to demand a return for it.
I think we’ve talked about humans and natural resources before.
- There it is. - Value of Natural Resources
relevance - open source (software, etc.) - Ignorance is a resource
This page is auto-translated from /nishio/誰にとってのリソースか using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I’m very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.