Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!rutgers!att!akgua!brb
From: brb@akgua.ATT.COM (Brian R. Bainter)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Reason *not* to get new Borland "Turbo" releases
Message-ID: <1843@akgua.ATT.COM>
Date: 6 Nov 88 20:31:39 GMT
References: <4203@tekgvs.GVS.TEK.COM>
Organization: AT&T Network Systems/Bell Labs, Atlanta GA
Lines: 32

From article <4203@tekgvs.GVS.TEK.COM>, by toma@tekgvs.GVS.TEK.COM (Tom Almy):
> The latest Turbo releases (C - 2.0, Pascal -5.0, Assembler -1.0)
> contain a new clause in the licence agreement.
> 
> Was: "Programs that you write using [name of product] may be used, given
> away or sold without additional license or fees".
> 
> Now: "Programs that you write using [name of product] may be used, given
> away or sold without additional license or fees, as long as all copies of 
> such programs bear a copyright notice.  By 'copyright notice,' we mean either
> your own copyright notice or, if you prefer, the statment, "Created using 
> [name of product], Copyright (c) Borland 1988.'"

I think that we need a little clarification here. As has been with Turbo C
1.0 - 1.5 at least as far as I am aware, there has always been a Borland
copyright notice put in to the data section of each and every .EXE or .COM
program produced. I don't see what the difference is. Besides, whenever I
write a program, PD or not, I always include a copyright notice in it. I
am usually fairly proud of the programs that I produce.

In other words, BIG DEAL!

A copyright notice does not exclude the public from copying a program if
the notice gives permission to do so.

Brian,

-- 
	Brian R. Bainter   KA7TXA

 AT&T Technologies Atlanta Works
 {gatech, att}akgua!brb