Xref: utzoo comp.sys.amiga:14328 comp.sys.misc:1138 comp.sys.ibm.pc:11754 comp.sys.mac:12503 comp.sys.atari.st:7502
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!steinmetz!hamlet!hallett
From: hallett@hamlet.steinmetz (Jeff A. Hallett)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga,comp.sys.misc,comp.sys.ibm.pc,comp.sys.mac,comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: Re: enforcement of Sharewar
Message-ID: <9474@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP>
Date: 9 Feb 88 13:59:59 GMT
References: <8055@g.ms.uky.edu> <174@piring.cwi.nl> <39450@sun.uucp> <121@ritcv.UUCP> <1012@sask.UUCP>
Sender: news@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP
Reply-To: desdemona!hallett@steinmetz.UUCP (Jeffrey A. Hallett)
Organization: General Electric CRD, Schenectady, NY
Lines: 43

In article <1012@sask.UUCP> long@sask.UUCP (Warren Long) writes:
>>
>> Perhaps the worst I have ever seen of this type is a program, DS, a
>> progam to help move, delete, copy, etc. files on hard disks. While the
>> program was quite good, and the request for money was small ($15), the
>> program had a 10 second delay at the beginning and the end of a run.
>> Instructions for disabling this pause were available only after you
>> coughed up the $15.  This, to me, is a type of blackmail.  Since the
>> use of this program is to be a quick utility that works faster and
>> easier than DOS commands, a delay like this was way out of line.
>> Needless to say, I don't use the program, and would never suggest that
>> anyone else do.
>
>I am impressed with the method used, and am surprised at the audacity
>of the above user.  The author has found a very clever way of 
>protecting his SHAREWARE product, which allows a user to sample the
>product, yet requires an end-user to pay IF and only IF he/she intends
>to use it regularly.

Again, this treads a fine line.  I'm assuming (via the closed world
assumption) that the program was not disabled in any way.  In that
case, what the author did is indeed clever; he discouraged theft.  I
see no problem with calling this shareware - if people register like
they are supposed to, then the discouragment is removed.  If they do
not, well, then they take what they get - a working program with an
annoyance that in NO WAY affects its functionality.

In a different light, authors that remove functionality (like
FontDisplay) until you pay, or authors who withhold documentation for
a complex system (Scholar's Aid) have no right whatsoever to call
their products ShareWare.  They are forcing you to pay before you can
fully use their product.  There is no difference between this and the
"Draw It Again, Sam" demo that was posted.   At this point, they are
no longer getting "donations" for their work, they are soliciting
purchase.  This makes them a commerical operation, but one which
offers no benefits of a real such organization.

Jeffrey A. Hallett                     | ARPA: hallett@ge-crd.arpa   
Software Technology Program    	       | UUCP: desdemona!hallett@steinmetz.uucp
GE Corporate Research and Development  | (518) 387-5654
+--------------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
|                            Credo Quia Absurdum Est                          |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+