Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!snorkelwacker!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!sumax!polari!root From: root@polari.UUCP (The Super User) Newsgroups: comp.sources.d Subject: Re: Get shareware off the network Summary: Fair play Keywords: You want to make money off of me? Pay me rent! Message-ID: <1294@polari.UUCP> Date: 21 Feb 90 21:47:46 GMT References: <1287@polari.UUCP> <1990Feb20.220848.7809@wang.com> Reply-To: root@.UUCP (The Super User) Organization: PolarServ, Seattle WA Lines: 32 I'm not sure what the wang guy's point is. I do contribute to the network directly and indirectly, with free feeds for several systems in the seattle area, cheap access for folks who can't get access any other way, and by giving away more than 500 hours of connect time every month. I'm contributing the exactly the same things that uunet is, the only difference is in scale. My point on shareware is that in using usenet as a distribution channel, and then claiming that you can't use the product unless you pay (however vacuous that claim is) they're not contributing anything in particular to the network as a whole. In fact, the majority of the machines that recieve the shareware CAN'T use it. There are better distribution channels for shareware than usenet and I'd like to see them stop using net bandwidth for their own personal gain. Now if they gave copies away to site admins or worked out some deal where interested site admins could subscribe to a shareware distribution mailist, that'd be great, but this unasked-for use is a tremendous waste of net resources. (Which I feel a little more than most because I pay for it out of my own pocket.) The analogy here is if I started posting frequently to all of the groups that I carry an advertisement about my system; that's unsolicited purely commercial activity, and I'd call that the same as shareware in this case, and I'd be writing an equivalent note about it. It so happens that there are places to announce new products (comp.announce.newprods) and there's a public service listing of public access unix systems (nixpub) but both of those venues work WITHIN the network structure. Shareware is a commercial venture, and should probably have a seperate venue for it. I'll stand by my statement. Shareware authors want a distribution channel? They should be prepared to trade something of value for it. This distribution channel is not free.