Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!caip!lll-crg!lll-lcc!pyramid!decwrl!amdcad!csanders
From: csanders@amdcad.UUCP (Craig S. Anderson)
Newsgroups: net.micro.mac
Subject: Re: Facist Licensing Agreement
Message-ID: <12142@amdcad.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 26-Jun-86 20:25:50 EDT
Article-I.D.: amdcad.12142
Posted: Thu Jun 26 20:25:50 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 28-Jun-86 03:49:34 EDT
References: <1012@spice.cs.cmu.edu> <12021@amdcad.UUCP> <521@ccird1.UUCP>
Reply-To: csanders@amdcad.UUCP (Craig S. Anderson)
Organization: AMD, Sunnyvale, California
Lines: 21

In article <521@ccird1.UUCP> rb@ccird1.UUCP (Rex Ballard) writes:
>It is nice to see someone use a BBS for distributing software.  OK,
>so it costs a little bit extra, isn't $6 better than $60?  If you
>don't have compuserve or whatever, you can still get it from a friend
>who does, he just has to pay for two downloads, and probably pass the
>cost on to you.  Perhaps where many copies are needed, a call to Apple
>would yield an agreement, including a modest but reasonable fee, to
>allow "authorised" reproduction for the specified number of copies.

I am not a lawyer, but I think Apple could have put a statement like
"Anybody you distribute this software to also agrees to abide
by this contract/agreement" instead of having the idiotic situation of having
to download the same software twice to give to a friend.  I am
also kind of mad that Apple sold me a Mac+ with the "deadly"
System 3.0/Finder 5.1 software months after they knew of the problem
(i.e. late May).  However, I am still glad they chose to
use Compuserve to distribute the new OS instead of having to wait
8 weeks for some dealer to get it.

Craig Anderson
{your favourite backbone}!amdcad!csanders