Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!cmcl2!phri!marob!manes
From: manes@marob.MASA.COM (Steve Manes)
Newsgroups: comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d
Subject: Re: What commercial programs to post?
Message-ID: <597@marob.MASA.COM>
Date: 22 Mar 89 11:58:01 GMT
References: <15825@princeton.Princeton.EDU>
Organization: ESCC  New York City
Lines: 49

From article <15825@princeton.Princeton.EDU>, by nr@notecnirp.Princeton.EDU (Norman Ramsey):
> It sounds like a good idea to try to cooperate with the ASP on issues
> like labelling (e.g. making a clear distinction between shareware and
> PD *before* downloading) and how ``shareware'' and ``registered''
> versions should differ (if at all).

ASP policy (or, rather, policy probably to be voted on in the next
couple of weeks and most likely passed) is that there should be no
difference between registered and Shareware versions, with the exception
of after-registration services (like support) or nonessential
enticements like source code, printed manuals, etc.  I'm coming from a
vested position, of course, but I think if you're going to have
Shareware it's in everyone's best interests to support the group that's
trying to address the gripes and misunderstandings in the market.  I
only joined ASP fairly recently and was completely unaware that users
EXPECT such stuff as a fresh disk with the latest version (I asssumed
that they already had it) and a receipt for their registration fee, even
if paid for by check.  I've also had my chops busted for not offering
registered users printed, bound documentation so out I go today to pick
up a laser printer and Manuscript.

> It also might be possible to make
> some kind of special agreement with the ASP given the noncommerical
> nature of the USENET.  USENET reaches a lot of people who never call a
> BBS, and the ASP might be willing to make concessions (like dropping
> mandator payment notices) to reach that audience.  Would someone who
> has connections with the ASP be willing to investigate?

ASP doesn't have the mandate to tell authors how to market their
software, what prices to charge, what license terms to demand, etc. 
ASP is just an association of independent authors and vendors trying to
bring some kind of standard of ethics and professionalism to the
Shareware market.  Members may either choose to follow ASP guidelines or
(in the absence of satisfactory resolution with the board) resign.

> Would it help if software were clearly identified in the header?
> Sites might be able to decide whether to keep postings on the basis of
> classifications like ``shareware,'' ``freeware'' (like GNU), or
> ``public domain.''

Someone else here suggested that and I think it's good idea.  This is
something I'm going to propose to the members as a general advisory to
authors who upload their own products to distribution sites.  Perhaps
just a "xxxxxxxx (ASP)" would suffice on those systems with restricted
description headers.
-- 
Steve Manes            Roxy Recorders, Inc.             Magpie-HQ BBS
UUCP : {rutgers|cmcl2}!hombre!magpie!manes              (212)420-0527
Smail: manes@MASA.COM