Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!usc!snorkelwacker!spdcc!esegue!johnl
From: johnl@esegue.segue.boston.ma.us (John R. Levine)
Newsgroups: comp.misc
Subject: Re: Old Software: what's legal/ethical?
Keywords: copyright, licenses
Message-ID: <1990Jan4.182928.3154@esegue.segue.boston.ma.us>
Date: 4 Jan 90 18:29:28 GMT
References: <1990Jan4.152944.8744@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu>
Reply-To: johnl@esegue.segue.boston.ma.us (John R. Levine)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Segue Software, Cambridge MA
Lines: 26

In article <1990Jan4.152944.8744@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu> doug%mathel@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu (Doug James) writes:
>I wish to comply with both the letter and spirit of software licensing
>agreements and copyright restrictions.

Then you'd better not ever use your software on a computer, look at some of
the tiny type on many shrink-wrap licenses.  There is little reason to
believe that shrink-wrap licenses are binding on the purchaser and plenty of
reason to think that they're not, both because the purchaser has no
opportunity to negotiate the terms (a so-called contract of adhesion) and
practically because no sucessful suit based on a shrink-wrap license has
ever been brought.  I'm no more in favor of software piracy than anyone
else, but believe that the only reasonable legal protection for retail
software is copyright.

>May I give away my version 1.0 [after I buy an upgrade to 2.0?]

An excellent question.  It seems to me that since you paid for 2.0, you now
own two separable documents and are free to dispose of each independently.  If
they gave away the update it might be possible to claim that the update was
in some sense part of the original product.  This sort of thing can keep
lawyers dancing on the head of a pin forever, there's not much more to say
than to do what you think is right.  The law is as yet totally unclear.
-- 
John R. Levine, Segue Software, POB 349, Cambridge MA 02238, +1 617 864 9650
johnl@esegue.segue.boston.ma.us, {ima|lotus|spdcc}!esegue!johnl
"Now, we are all jelly doughnuts."