Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!saxony!dgil
From: dgil@pa.reuter.COM (Dave Gillett)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
Subject: Re: Propriety of recycling software
Message-ID: <404@saxony.pa.reuter.COM>
Date: 15 Sep 90 22:59:08 GMT
References: <125520@kean.ucs.mun.ca> <12990002@hplsla.HP.COM>
Organization: Reuter:file Inc  (A Reuter Company) Palo Alto, CA
Lines: 22

In <12990002@hplsla.HP.COM> richw@hplsla.HP.COM (Rich Wilson) quotes a
previous posting without giving the poster's name:

>That has got to be the most ridiculous loophole I ever heard of in my
>life.  In other words, ANYONE who knows ANYONE who has an old version
>of software can essentially get the new version at the Upgrade
>price???
>Wow, I've got to try this.. :-)

If Borland wants to treat everyone who is interested enough in running their
software to obtain legitimate access to a copy of it just as if they had gone
out and paid list for it, that's a decision to provide quality service to
their users and completely within their prerogatives.  Sure, it's a loophole,
but closing it would violate the spirit of their "No-Nonsense" approach to
licensing.

If Borland loses money on this and goes belly-up, we can say that it was a bad
choice.  If Borland gains many loyal customers, who have praise for their
products and services, and thus makes a ton of money, we can say that it was
a good choice.  But *in either case*, none of us is in a position to say that
it's a "ridiculous" choice.
                                               Dave