Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site calmasd.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!talcott!panda!genrad!decvax!ittatc!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcc3!sdcc6!calmasd!rjh
From: rjh@calmasd.UUCP (Bob Hofkin)
Newsgroups: net.micro
Subject: Re: software protection - dongles & other gizmos
Message-ID: <519@calmasd.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 2-Aug-85 12:25:49 EDT
Article-I.D.: calmasd.519
Posted: Fri Aug  2 12:25:49 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 4-Aug-85 07:04:22 EDT
References: <1673@ecsvax.UUCP> <1674@ecsvax.UUCP> <433@othervax.UUCP>
Reply-To: rjh@calmasd.UUCP (Bob Hofkin)
Organization: Calma Company, San Diego, CA
Lines: 22

In article <433@othervax.UUCP> ray@othervax.UUCP (Raymond D. Dunn) writes:
>
>You ONLY have the right to do what you pay for as specified in the
>    license agreement, however restrictive or relaxed.
>
>The same rules apply to all products.  One difference with software is that
>it is so easy to copy (thus the licensing agrrement).

Wrong!  If I *BUY* the *PRODUCT* I can use it any way I want, subject
to law.  This is not the same as *LICENSING* the *USE* of a product.

I do not license the use of a shirt; I may lend it, copy it, or resell
it as I choose.  I do not license a book.  I can lend or resell it but
I may not copy it [legal restriction].  ENFORCING copy restriction is
irrelevant.  Record companies have the same problem.

Why is mass-marketed software different?  The store sells me a package
but I only bought the box, disk, and manual.  The software is lent on
sufferance by a vendor, who won't even maintain it.  They should cover
defects *AND* normal wear and tear [like an apartment rental].

Do you know any other product marketed this way [in the USA]?