Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!tekcrl!tekgvs!keithe
From: keithe@tekgvs.LABS.TEK.COM (Keith Ericson)
Newsgroups: comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d
Subject: "Evaluate-Ware" (was Re: Commercial software in comp...)
Message-ID: <4808@tekgvs.LABS.TEK.COM>
Date: 22 Mar 89 01:17:34 GMT
References: <6191@bsu-cs.UUCP>
Reply-To: keithe@tekgvs.LABS.TEK.COM (Keith Ericson)
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton,  OR.
Lines: 26

In article <6191@bsu-cs.UUCP> Rahul Dhesi <dhesi@bsu-cs.bsu.edu> writes:
>Sample license (call this example A), not OK to post:
>
>     "If you use this program beyond a trial period you are required 
>      to pay $x."
>
>Sample license (example B), OK to post:
>
>     "If you find this software useful, a payment of $x is requested."

I refer to example "A" as "evaluate-ware" meaning "see if you like
it; if you do, pay for it; if not, discard it."

I think it depends on WHO sends this evaluate-ware to the moderator.
If it comes from the author or other legitimate owner/distributor
then Rahul and CBIP is doing that person a favor by distributing it
at that owner's 'request.'  In that case I think the moderator
should feel free to post the program.

What to do with evaluate-ware submitted to the moderator by other than
the author/ owner/legitimate distributor is not as easily (?) resolved.

kEITH eRICSON

(Personally I'd like to see this "evaluate-ware" posted - USENET/CBIP is
simply a channel, a communication medium.)