Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!looking!brad
From: brad@looking.on.ca (Brad Templeton)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: Answer to various comments about ClariNet
Message-ID: <3533@looking.on.ca>
Date: 21 Jun 89 02:38:38 GMT
Organization: Looking Glass Software, Waterloo Ont.
Lines: 107
Class: discussion

You folks sure had a lot to say.  Can't a guy get any rest while he's
at USENIX?   Anyway, to answer the various points brought up:

o) Can ClariNet use the B news software?

	That's been pretty well answered on the net, but I will add
	that even if I couldn't, I will probably switch to C news, TMN
	or my own software, pretty much eliminating that question.

o) Isn't this unfair capitalization on the fine free efforts of the people
	who built USENET?

	Dunno.  Is posting a help wanted ad or job wanted ad in
	in misc.jobs abuse of USENET?  A request for info on how to
	write a device driver for your job?

	In fact, I'm using the B news file format for ClariNet articles
	to help USENET sites, not exploit them.  Would anybody suggest
	that I define a new format, and have all the customers install
	new software just so that they can run two incompatible
	electronic newsreading systems?  The whole idea is to put the
	news in a format that all you folks already know how to deal
	with -- that's for your benefit, and indirectly mine, in that
	doing things that are good for you helps me get customers.

o) Will ClariNet take resources and effort away from USENET?

	I don't think so, and in fact it might even be the reverse.
	Many people have asked, "how can I get my bosses to let me hook
	up our site to usenet?"  ClariNet might be an answer because it
	gives a solid benefit even CFOs can understand.   Hooking up to
	ClariNet will let you establish USENET news and email links at
	the same time, perhaps more easily in terms of company politics.

	So ClariNet may legitimize USENET at many firms, and thus help
	it grow.

o) Aren't you running down USENET by using the term "netnoise?"

	Hey, I didn't invent that term.   Neither, I think, does anybody
	deny that it characterizes many groups.  And many people even
	like that.  I like anarchy myself, but it's not the only thing
	in the world that I like, nor the only way to distributed information.
	I want to see USENET and ClariNet both thrive, side-by-side.

	USENET matches other networks and online services blow for blow
	when it comes to electronic conferences & email. (except when
	it comes to reliability on the email)  But electronic publishing
	was something that USENET just couldn't do, and I feel that I'm
	adding something here, not taking away.

o) Will ClariNet turn USENET into a legal battleground?
	
	Copyrighted information does always bring this risk, whether
	it's a wireservice or a message that says "you may only redistribute
	this if..." on the end.   But if there are problems, it will come
	because of the thieves.  I don't actually own the copyrights on
	any of the current ClariNet stuff, so I won't be doing much enforcing.
	On the other hand, if you feel like stealing from a wireservice
	company, I can't imagine much that could be dumber.   Of course,
	pirated wire articles have appeared on USENET before, and many
	netters have other access to them -- I'm not bringing in anything
	new in this case.

	It is my fervent hope that there will not be any piracy that
	I can't deal with.  I think that's the case because it's the
	kind of piracy you can't do in secret -- you have to do it
	on an ongoing basis, and it has to be done in a semi-public
	manner.   It's not like pirating a program that you hide on
	a disk somewhere in your office.  This should make it easy for
	me to find and cut-off pirates if they try anything.  Without
	resorting to the final straw of the legal system.

o) Is non-free news software a violation of the USENET tradition?
	
	I don't think so.  Lesk's UUCP, Honey DanBer UUCP, UNIX itself and
	many of the TCP/IP packages that are the very soul of USENET have
	been commercial software since the dawn of the net.  Commercial
	packages for reading news on IBM PCs and other computers have been
	around for years.  I saw a Mac package at USENIX.  I'm hardly the
	first here!

o) Will the Internet really allow electronic publishing?

	Here's my philosophy on the matter.  If you subscribe to a publication
	from ClariNet, it's up to you to ship it to your machine.  You pay
	the costs.  You want to dial up a feed point via modem?  Fine.  You
	want to install a leased line to a feed point?  Fine.  You want to
	use your valid internet access to pick it up?  I think that's fine
	too.

	You're doing the "shipping," and paying for it.  Not me.  The
	internet exists to let authorized users get easier access to
	the information and facilities that they want to get.  You will
	be the one using the internet to make it easier to pick up the
	information, not me.  And if you're authorized to use the internet,
	then that's what it's for.

	It's similar to (for example) connecting to a supercomputer that
	you buy time on by TELNET.   The TELNET is there to make it easier
	for you to use the for-pay service.

	And I can't think of a better definition of "information desired
	by an internet user" than "what they're willing to pay actual $$ for."

-- 
Brad Templeton, Looking Glass Software Ltd.  --  Waterloo, Ontario 519/884-7473