Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!hao!gatech!purdue!i.cc.purdue.edu!j.cc.purdue.edu!pur-ee!iuvax!inuxc!ihnp4!alberta!myrias!cg
From: cg@myrias.UUCP (Chris Gray)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.misc
Subject: Re: Guidelines on legal protection for shareware & freeware
Message-ID: <552@myrias.UUCP>
Date: 4 Feb 88 18:34:44 GMT
References: <6784@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>
Organization: Myrias Research, Edmonton
Lines: 37
Summary: "Shareware" does not REQUIRE a donation

Mike Meyers has posted a long article which includes some suggestions on
how to set up a license that would require people to pay for shareware that
they use. To me, this doesn't make any sense. I've always thought of
shareware as software that is freely redistributable, and can be used by
anyone, for any purpose (unless a Copyright prohibits something, such as
direct commercial use), but for which the author requests a donation if the
program is found to be useful. Note the word 'requests'. I don't think I've
seen any shareware where the author REQUIRED a donation. I wouldn't call
that shareware, I'd call it a commercial program.

I'm one of those dreaded people who have sent out shareware for the Amiga:
the Draco compiler, and Amiga Empire. I've also sent out some freeware, in
which the documentation (if any!) didn't even request a donation. I'll
likely send out more of both in the future. To me, the difference is this:

- if I label something as shareware, I plan on it being an active project,
  and people's suggestions for improvements, bug fixes, etc. will be heeded.
  The project is quite large, however, and some sort of reward for my
  efforts would be nice. Because of simple human nature, I will pay more
  attention to the suggestions of those who send money than to the
  suggestions of those who don't (I will also pay more attention to
  suggestions I agree with!) Both of the above mentioned shareware items
  are things that could have been commercial products, with some effort
  spent on documentation and packaging. From what I've heard, the Draco
  compiler was stabler on its release than either of the two commercial
  C compilers were.

- if I label something as freeware (by not labelling it as shareware, and
  by not Copyrighting it), then I'm doing it for fun, and don't much care
  about getting rewarded for my efforts. Some people (bless their hearts)
  are able to classify all of their work this way. For me, something that
  I class as freeware is not likely to be worked on again, unless some
  fun-sounding suggestion arouses my interest.

-- 
Chris Gray		Myrias Research, Edmonton	+1 403 428 1616
	{uunet!mnetor,ubc-vision,watmath,vax135}!alberta!myrias!cg