Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!samsung!raybed2!rayssd!anomaly!mpd From: mpd@anomaly.SBS.COM (Michael P. Deignan) Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc Subject: Re: LEGALITY OF SELLING SOFTWARE Message-ID: <1991Feb24.204104.5084@anomaly.SBS.COM> Date: 24 Feb 91 20:41:04 GMT References: <1991Feb21.012456.22548@amd.com> Distribution: usa Organization: Small Business Systems, Inc., Esmond, RI 02917 Lines: 78 phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) writes: >And you have a better idea? I won't ask you to give MS credit for at >least trying to address an issue few other companies show concern for, >since you seem to hate them so much. Yeah, I've got a better idea. Its called spelling out the terms of usage in the "license agreement" and leaving it at that. All this little "pass" does is reduce programmers to children. I, for one, find it insulting. >If you have two users and one license, you have to coordinate usage somehow. If I have twenty users, I have to coordinate usage somehow. With or without the little piece of paper which says "pass", I cannot (nor can Microsoft) insure that the software will only be used by one person at a time. Even otherwise "honest" companies can screw up. >The license agreement, which you apparently haven't bothered to read, >but are happy to flame about, allows for this. The full license defines >two types of use, DEDICATED and TRANSITORY. >In DEDICATED use, you basically load the SW on one and only one machine and >anyone is allowed to use it. In addition, if there is one user who uses the >machine more than 80% of the time, he/she is also allowed to use the SW >on a portable or home machine. So I must now purchase a single 1.2 gig hard drive system so each programmer can take "turns" compiling their program? What next, a ticket machine and a "Now Serving #" sign out front? >If Joe wants to use your machine while you are out to lunch, this is fine. Sorry, Joe can't copy his 15 megs of source code onto a floppy, stick it in my PC, compile it, and then offload the object deck to his floppy for transport back to his machine. >In TRANSITORY use, every user is required to have a license card in their >physical possession. Which is the incredible puerile, assinine thing that I object to. >I don't think it's asking too much for you to leave your license card >on your desk when you go out to lunch in case someone else wants it. But, people often forget to do things. What happens if I take the card home so I can use the package on my portable, but then get very sick the next day and can't come into work? Does that mean the rest of the staff can't use the package because I, attempting to comply with the stupid terms of the license agreement, have the card? >I guess they are relying on the honor system, for which they seem to >draw your contempt. What's your alternative, Mr. Smart Guy? They are not relying on the "honor system". If they were, there wouldn't be a little pass. They would only state "only used this software on one machine at a time". Instead, they decide to reduce programmers to children. >And what is your point? Some companies do use such schemes and I think >they are horrible. MS doesn't, and you think they stink. I wonder if >they could do anything that would meet with your approval? Point is, if they TRUELY wanted to enforce the terms of their license agreement, they would provide a means where only a single user could be using the package at a time. One of the parallel port plugs would accomplish exactly that. However, in doing this, there are a great number of people, who would return the software, as they do not purchase copy protected software. MD -- -- Michael P. Deignan / They're not "bombs". -- Domain: mpd@anomaly.sbs.com / They're "gifts". -- UUCP: ...!uunet!rayssd!anomaly!mpd / "Gifts From Above". -- Telebit: +1 401 455 0347 /