Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!cs.utexas.edu!natinst!rpp386!jfh
From: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II)
Newsgroups: comp.sources.d
Subject: Re: Paying for Shareware (Was: Re: v09i070: newsclip 1.1...)
Message-ID: <17916@rpp386.cactus.org>
Date: 11 Feb 90 19:51:08 GMT
References: <1233@utoday.UUCP>
Reply-To: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II)
Organization: Lone Star Cafe and BBS Service
Lines: 42

In article <1233@utoday.UUCP> greenber@utoday.UUCP (Ross M. Greenberg) writes:
>I do request payment.  Demands can be made when you're able to enforce them.
>I know damned well that a demand is -- currently -- unenforceable.  But
>I am entitled to restrict the usage license on my software contingent upon
>anything I like.  That's the law.  And, I've restricted mine so that you're
>able to use it freely for a while, but then must pay me for the continued
>right to continue using the software.

I've avoided this until now, and I stick my nose in only because I keep
wondering why articles with this topic continue to be KILL'd.

The law, more likely than not, is that even the license is unenforcable,
and that shareware is pretty much available for free public use, without
restriction of any kind, if it is distributed in a medium such as USENET.

A license is a contract.  Once you have given me the software by sending
it out on a public network, you are unable to force me to agree to the
terms of the contract.  Others have suggested analogies to the postal
system.  I didn't ask for it, and now I am free to do with it as I please.

And what is unethical, and probably illegal as well considering the
non-commercial nature of the Internet, is that people are being forced
to provide the distribution for your software.  It costs money to
provide Internet connections and UUCP connections, and the administrative
services to maintain the systems.  And you are, if you are a successful
shareware author, sitting back and collecting money that was earned for
you by others who have provided this "distribution mechanism".

Before anyone screams about DEC or SUN or AT&T posting messages, remember
that no one is forcing these customers to buy any of these vendors
computers, nor are these vendors forcing the customers they have already
being forced to pay for answers posted to the USENET.  By way of bogus
analogy, the terms and conditions of a shareware posting are not unlike
DEC attaching a "license" requiring anyone who read a posting giving an
answer to a problem with a VAX to send them $10 or to completely forget
how to fix that problem forever.

USENET is a =free= co-operative network.  People who take advantage of
=free= things in life are scum.  High ideals or not, they remain scum.
-- 
John F. Haugh II                             UUCP: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh
Ma Bell: (512) 832-8832                           Domain: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org