Xref: utzoo misc.legal:25931 alt.sources.d:1801
Newsgroups: misc.legal,alt.sources.d
Path: utzoo!utdoe!contact!robohack!eci386!woods
From: woods@eci386.uucp (Greg A. Woods)
Subject: Re: Charging the net...
Message-ID: <1991May8.173552.2204@eci386.uucp>
Reply-To: woods@eci386.UUCP (Greg A. Woods)
Organization: Elegant Communications Inc.
References: <4RuD24w164w@mantis.co.uk> <1991May7.000512.1961@eci386.uucp> <6579:May706:09:5591@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>
Date: Wed, 8 May 1991 17:35:52 GMT

In article <6579:May706:09:5591@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes:
> In article <1991May7.000512.1961@eci386.uucp> woods@eci386.UUCP (Greg A. Woods) writes:
> > Shareware, by definition, depends upon a licence.
> 
> Not necessarily.
>[.... a copyright notice ....]
> That's not a license. It's just a copyright limitation, and it's legally
> sound. I'd still say that Fubar 6.66 is shareware.

Hm... interesting point.

Your wording isn't all that great, and probably contains a few
loopholes, but I get the idea!  :-)

However, if you (the copyright holder of Fubar 6.66) were to post Fubar
6.66 to Usenet, I'd say you wouldn't be able to uphold your copyright.
This is the point I was essentially trying to make.
-- 
							Greg A. Woods
woods@{eci386,gate,robohack,ontmoh,tmsoft}.UUCP		ECI and UniForum Canada
+1-416-443-1734 [h]  +1-416-595-5425 [w]  VE3TCP	Toronto, Ontario CANADA
Political speech and writing are largely the defense of the indefensible-ORWELL