That's a strange issue to have a government mandate. No one was compelled to type those programs in if they didn't want to. I came from the time of seeing those in magazines, and most I never bothered to type in because it wasn't that interested in what they did. Some I did type in because it's a good learning experience especially when you have to go back and debug where you mistype something.
If governments try and restrict this, which is effectively a manual instruction method for achieving an outcome how many other manual instruction methods for achieving an outcome would also get inadvertently restricted? I am quite curious at the basis for the question around the legality of it because that strikes me as very odd, and I'd really like to know the thought process.
The EU already regulates the charging port on your mobile phone. Typing in a lengthy program is far more inconvenient than dealing with a less‑than‑ideal port.
That's comparing two quite dissimilar things. The charging port on your phone is about standardization and interoperability between devices and with external devices. Governments typically have to do this because the industry fails utterly to do this even though it always benefits the industries to have standardization. You can simply look back at a plain telephone, those interfaces have been standardized and regulated. Electricity is also another thing that has been standardized and regulated. This breaks up monopolistic ecosystems and encourages innovation by having this standard in which many things can operate on. In some cases the industry comes together and forms a working group and agrees upon standards and everything is great in some cases, like Apple and they're charging port, they staunchly refuse to come together in a common agreement and this is really where governments need to step in because it makes it better for everyone. It always boggles my mind that companies actively work at harming their own future business growth.
I am really not sure how typing in a program that has been written on paper relates to any of those things that require standardization for interoperability.
My question was less about could they do it because governments can regulate all kinds of crazy things. It was more about why this would even come up as a thought and a proposal in your mind. Because the marketplace would actually solve for this problem all by itself. Distributing a program on media has an increased cost to it as opposed to just printing it out on some paper. Back in the day when these things were popular, if a given program was popular enough someone would write it down save it to a disk and distribute it for a nominal fee.
You still haven't answered my question. You're just kind of avoiding it at this point. Maybe because you don't have an answer or maybe because as you logically think through it it becomes kind of a strange position to even think about.
If governments try and restrict this, which is effectively a manual instruction method for achieving an outcome how many other manual instruction methods for achieving an outcome would also get inadvertently restricted? I am quite curious at the basis for the question around the legality of it because that strikes me as very odd, and I'd really like to know the thought process.