Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ttrdc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!ltuxa!ttrdc!levy
From: levy@ttrdc.UUCP (Daniel R. Levy)
Newsgroups: net.micro
Subject: Re: Your (preferred) software rights...
Message-ID: <681@ttrdc.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 12-Jan-86 01:38:41 EST
Article-I.D.: ttrdc.681
Posted: Sun Jan 12 01:38:41 1986
Date-Received: Mon, 13-Jan-86 01:02:00 EST
References: <1220@brl-tgr.ARPA> <473@looking.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T, Computer Systems Division, Skokie, IL
Lines: 76

In article <473@looking.UUCP>, brad@looking.UUCP (Brad Templeton) writes:
>
>	Market forces will work very well in the computer biz.  In this
>	industry, it's the *norm* to see revolutionary change in less than
>	a year.  Even IBM, greatest bastion of conservative business
>	practices, came out with a machine 4 times better than the PC in
>	4 years.  Let's see Ford Motors do that!
>
	Alas, the propagation of the market forces in the case of software
	(you are speaking of HARDWARE here in your example) is through enough
	people getting stuck with snake oil that the rumors become unignorable,
	and people don't buy certain packages (or even from certain vendors)
	because of the tales of suffering from their neighbors.  That does
	not sound like the most admirable consumer protection mechanism in the
	world, especially for people who are novices and/or lack a good
	grapevine connection.
	
>	Take a look at the largest companies in the world, particularly the
>	largest retailers.  They got where they were by providing reliable
>	service that pleased customers.  Nobody had to pass a law enforcing
>	the Eaton's Guarantee (Large department store chain, grew that way with
>	1 year unconditional guarantee on *all* merchandise)
>
	(I presume Eaton's is Canadian?)
	Yes, nobody legislates excellence in service.  But should Eaton's have
	decided to be the other way, to market lousy products and then act like
	a S.O.B. when people tried to take them back, surely even in Canada
	there is legislation which puts a limit to how far that may go?

>	Buying software that somebody else wrote is not a right, it's a
>	priviledge.  Just like the software publisher doesn't have a right
>	to your money.  Any deal you want to work out is between you and
>	him, bringing in Government goons will just make me sell my software
>	to others, if you leave me with a choice. (Which you probably won't)

	FLAME!!!!!  ROARRRR!!!!! BURNERS TO MAX!!!!!!

	SNOOTY, REALLY SNOOTY at best.  The 'someone' who wrote the software
	in question decided to MARKET IT.  And when he/she did, and accepted
	MONEY (or the equivalent) in return for allowing others to use it,
	somehow I have great difficulty regarding that as a favor or the grant-
	ing of a 'privilege'.  If the 'government goons' lay down requirements
	that software you DECIDE TO MARKET must meet certain minimum require-
	ments of fairness, like stating copy protection status, if any, includ-
	ing the deliberate presence of 'worms' [destructive copy protection
	schemes], and spelling out licensing requirements and backup
	allowances, etc. on the outer cover or in documentation which must be
	available to the public at the point of sale, then that would be to
	the detriment of nobody but the dishonest!

	It would be nice too if a copy of the manual was required to be
	readable before purchase and that the software was reasonably
	guaranteed to at least meet the description in the manual [allowing
	that some unintentional typos may occur], but maybe that would be a
	bit much to ask on first effort, eh?

>--
>Brad Templeton, Looking Glass Software Ltd. - Waterloo, Ontario 519/884-7473

	Coolers on now.  Sizzle, sputter, dribble....

	Perhaps understandable viewpoint, looking at where this guy is
	coming from.  Yet I would hope that the industry would take the
	aforementioned 'Eatons' as an example and voluntarily present as
	fair and as descriptive as possible of a sales interface to the
	user, so that nobody, not even the novice, would have a valid
	reason to complain that they bought a copy of a program which wasn't
	really what they thought it was.  Then maybe the government would
	stay off the industry's back.
-- 
 -------------------------------    Disclaimer:  The views contained herein are
|       dan levy | yvel nad      |  my own and are not at all those of my em-
|         an engihacker @        |  ployer or the administrator of any computer
| at&t computer systems division |  upon which I may hack.
|        skokie, illinois        |
 --------------------------------   Path: ..!ihnp4!ttrdc!levy