Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!mcsun!ukc!servax0!sersun2!alan
From: alan@sersun2.essex.ac.uk (Stanier A)
Newsgroups: comp.sources.d
Subject: Re: Paying for Shareware (Was: Re: v09i070: newsclip 1.1...)
Message-ID: <2921@servax0.essex.ac.uk>
Date: 16 Jan 90 11:25:47 GMT
References: <137@sneezy.tcom.stc.co.uk> <15398@well.UUCP> <1134@utoday.UUCP>
Sender: alan@servax0.essex.ac.uk
Reply-To: alan@essex.ac.uk
Organization: University of Essex, Colchester, UK
Lines: 11

In article <1134@utoday.UUCP> greenber@utoday.UUCP (Ross M. Greenberg) writes:
?But, if you're going to proclaim you're dishonest, unethical and willing
?to use another's intellectual property without paying for it (that's
                                                               ^^^^^^
?called theft), then please do the shareware authors of the world a favor?
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^

Not under English law it isn't. The definition of theft includes the requirement
of the "intention permanently to deprive", which is not clearly present in
this case. Call him dishonest or unethical if you will (I wouldn't), but
calling him a thief is probably libellous.