Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!utoday!greenber From: greenber@utoday.UUCP (Ross M. Greenberg) Newsgroups: comp.sources.d Subject: Re: Paying for Shareware (Was: Re: v09i070: newsclip 1.1...) Message-ID: <1238@utoday.UUCP> Date: 12 Feb 90 04:39:57 GMT References: <1233@utoday.UUCP> <17916@rpp386.cactus.org> <14109@s.ms.uky.edu> Reply-To: greenber@utoday.UUCP (Ross M. Greenberg) Organization: UNIX Today!, Manhasset, NY Lines: 54 In article <14109@s.ms.uky.edu> sean@ms.uky.edu (Sean Casey) writes: >jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II) writes: > > >My biggest concern in that area is the potential for abuse. Ross Greenberg >and others are providing a good product for a good price. But others may be >attracted by the possibility of abusing it and scamming a lot of people out >of their money. Thanks, Sean. I like to think that my code is good stuff and is presented at a reasonable price with adequate support. I'd like to be able to continue providing such code, but that code actually costs me a bundle every week -- support, telephone, etc. Heck, even legal fees. As for the people scamming you (and me!), I'm against them, too. We're on the same side in this issue. I would suggest that you take a look at code provided my authors who qualified for entry in the Association of Shareware Professionals. The ASP does not vouch that the code is any code at all, and they are not a revewiing body of the worth of that code. But, to gain admission into ASP you must meet certain criteria. You must offer free support for at least 30 days, you must provide the name, telehone number and E-mail/snail mail addresses of a representative of ASP, the Ombudsmen, so a person can register a complaint against you if they desire, etc. There are 150-175 members of ASP right now: their products account for about the top 80% of the best selling shareware software. Every piece of shareware that has ever won a PCMag's Editor's Choice has been from an ASP member, for example. They're (We're) proud of being able to offer shareware via these alternative channels for a fraction on the price that the commercial guys do, and some of us make enough to be millionaires (not me, alas: $10 software is not put out because you expect to get rich!). > >That, combined with the license issue, is why I think the legal status >quo, "you don't have to pay for it", should be maintained. Too much potential >for destruction of liberties, and too much potential for "get rich quick >at the public's expense." > But, you don;t have to pay for it. Simply stop using it if you're not satisfied with the software and don;t think it's worth the requested price. That's the beauty of shareware. If too many people do as you are advising them to, that is to use shareware without paying for it, they'll be no incentive for the "good guys" to continue to provide it. Then, for example, you'll pay $190 for an anti-virus package instead of $10. Tooting my own horn, the $10 package is better! :-) -- Ross M. Greenberg, Technology Editor, UNIX Today! greenber@utoday.UUCP 594 Third Avenue, New York, New York, 10016 Voice:(212)-889-6431 BIX: greenber MCI: greenber CIS: 72461,3212 To subscribe, send mail to circ@utoday.UUCP with "Subject: Request"