Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!harvard!seismo!rochester!ritcv!cci632!ccird1!rb
From: rb@ccird1.UUCP (Rex Ballard)
Newsgroups: net.micro.mac
Subject: Re: Rental Software?
Message-ID: <422@ccird1.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 14-May-86 20:49:42 EDT
Article-I.D.: ccird1.422
Posted: Wed May 14 20:49:42 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 18-May-86 11:45:46 EDT
References: <4501@dartvax.UUCP> <74600001@prism>
Reply-To: rb@ccird1.UUCP (Rex Ballard)
Organization: CCI Rochester Development, Rochester NY
Lines: 44

In article <74600001@prism> jib@prism.UUCP writes:
>
>Legally, the copyright laws do not prohibit renting software (or anything
>else protected by the copyright laws).  Software manufacturers usually
>include licenses which prohibit renting the product, but except in
>Louisiana (which passed a law making such licenses binding on the
>purchaser), the enforcability (that is, the legality) of such licenses is
>not resolved.
>
>Obviously renting software and then copying it, IS ILLEGAL.  But renting
>it and trying it, probably is not.

It is interesting to note the language of different liscences.  Some liscences
bind the copy to the user, meaning that the user can plug the floppy into
any machine he wants but can't let another person borrow it.  Others bind
to a one machine, meaning that you can buy one copy put it onto the computer
an let a half dozen people take turns using it, but cannot pull the floppy
out and put it onto another machine.  A large majority do not bind to either,
but instead specify one user, one machine at any given time.  This prevents
two users from running a multi-tasking OS and simply plugging in a second
terminal.  The "one,one" liscence is the easiest to enforce, but has the
least restriction.  There is nothing to prevent sam@oscar from giving
dick@felix the only copy, or "key disk", so long as neither are using
it at the same time.  If dick@felix happens to pay for the privelidge
of borrowing the only copy, the publisher hasn't explicitly prevented it.

The best approach would be to expect, in addition to the purchase price,
a percentage per "performance" of any revenue gained from that performance.
Since the renter pays a fixed amount per day, even though the renter might
have his computer "perform" the software several dozen times, the royalties
would be the same as if he performed it only once.

It will be interesting to see if publishers start asking for a percentage
of revenue gained from such things as software and computer rentals and
leases.  This already occurs in some minicomputer software "leasing"
agreements.

Question: Are there any companies which market PC software on a "lease"
basis (monthly or annual fee) to end users or OEMs?  Are there any with
"optional maintenance fees"?  If so, this is very similar to "royalties".

My guess is that many large companies wish to stay clear of anything even
resembling "royalties", because contributing authors might decide they
want some "royalties" too.