Xref: utzoo comp.sys.amiga:13110 comp.sys.misc:977 comp.sys.ibm.pc:10605 comp.sys.mac:11003 comp.sys.atari.st:6946
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!sri-spam!ames!amdcad!sun!concertina!fiddler
From: fiddler%concertina@Sun.COM (Steve Hix)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga,comp.sys.misc,comp.sys.ibm.pc,comp.sys.mac,comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: Re: Software (and other kinds of) copying
Keywords: technology changes things
Message-ID: <39450@sun.uucp>
Date: 20 Jan 88 20:50:11 GMT
References: <8055@g.ms.uky.edu> <174@piring.cwi.nl>
Sender: news@sun.uucp
Lines: 59

In article <174@piring.cwi.nl>, jack@cwi.nl (Jack Jansen) writes:
> 
> I hope this doesn't make me sound like a dogmatic Marxist (I am neither),
> but I still feel that capitalism is the problem: people want money back in
> return for their efforts, and aren't satisfied with fame or esteem or whatever
> else.

Hard to buy a house with esteem or fame...same goes for lunch.  You
can't eat money...

> Now, that is reasonable if you make 'hardware': a knife is a knife even if
> you don't want to share it. But, it doesn't work for ideas....
> In this case, I mean the type of software that everyone copies:
> games, utilities, all the nifty stuff that you would probably not buy
> otherwise. 

Nope.  Software is not an idea any more than a knife.  You can have
and idea about "knife", but the application of that idea, involving
resource (materials, energy, tools, skill,...) is all tied up in
producing the knife.  A program (game, utility, demo, whatever) needs
not only the initial concept (idea), but the programmer's tools for
development, hardware to run said tools, time, ...  This doesn't cover
overhead such as shelter, food, and whatnot.  Who's going to suport
me while I'm producing this thing, whatever it is?  (Usually, I
work full-time for someone else and do it in my spare time.  Whatever
*that* is.)

> It is probably different for a tailored account program for a big
> firm (but who would want to copy that).

Why? (Not about copying it!! :} )
 
> I think the GNU people are on the right track: give the software away free,
> so that people become to know and love it, and if you want to make money
> you charge for other things: support, documentation, training, etc.

People seem to value something more-or-less in proportion to what
it cost them (in money, time effort, whatever).  Note the general
treatment of shareware: People get it for free (or for minimal effort)
and very seldom do those who keep and use it ever pay *anything* for
it.  Which, besides being unfair, is dishonest.

The GNU people (particularly Mr. Stallman) might not continue with
their idealistic ways if they had no other source of income beside
the software that they're working on.  (Who's paying their bills?)
Is TANSTAAFL false?  (Seems to work most everywhere else, except
in politics.)

On the other hand, as a technical writer, I think that charging lots
for documentation is a pretty nifty idea...as long as I get my cut.
(Comes the revolution, comrade...!)  But who needs much documentation,
support, training, etc. for "Defender of the Crown"?  If such were
really needed and used, do you have any idea of the size and cost
of a really useful support organization?  (Hint:  >>More than what
is currently needed to write, package, market and distribute the
product as it currently stands.)

Nice-sounding idea, except that software is more than just an
idea...