dmimi@ecsvax.UUCP (Miriam Clifford) (05/24/85)
Several comments about the proposed software license bill in
California:
California is not the first state to consider such a bill.
Louisiana past such a bill last year. It is too early to tell if it
has had any effect. A Connecticut working group has also considered
such a bill, but has tentatively rejected it. Their reasons for doing
so was that the burden of establishing a restrictive licensing agree-
ment should be place upon the party it benefits. If a software
distributor wants a license to be enforceable, therefore, the distri-
butor must make sure that the proper formalities are followed.
Users of software should be very concerned with these bills. They are
being drafted and sponsored by software development companies, not users.
As written, they offer no protection to users. The software developer
can place any restriction desired into a software license and, under the
terms of the proposed bills, the terms become valid. In theory, a total
prohibition against making copies could be included (e.g. no backup allowed).
To prevent the type of abuse, the user community
must follow the consideration of the legislation closely. More importantly,
we must contact our legislators and insist that the bills contain protective
provisions for the user community. Primary among these must be the right
to make a reasonable number of backup copies and to transfer the software
to another machine. Additionally, no absolute prohibition on transfer
of ownership should be allowed. If the license is to require company
authority to transfer software, the company must be required to give that
authority without undue restriction upon the users and without requiring
the user to pay any substantial fee.
The major problem we will be facing as users is that the consideration of
these bills will be done state by state. Each of us should follow the
progress of such bills in our own states. An easy way of proceeding is
to write your state legislators NOW and ask them if any such bill has been
proposed within your state. Such a letter accomplishes two things: First,
it gets you the information you are seeking, second, it lets your legislators
know that this is an issue that is of concern to you as a user. When such
a bill is considered, the legislators may give it greater consideration than
occurred in Louisiana.
Ralph Clifford for
{decvax,ihnp4,akgua}!mcnc!ecsvax!dmimi
Mimi Clifford
2535 Sevier St
Durham, NC 27705
919-489-4821 919-684-2854 (Wed)