mj@myrias.com (Michal Jaegermann) (03/13/90)
Please kindly note that this is posted on behalf of a friend who,
for some unclear reasons, has problems with posting to newsgroups.
But he receives his mail OK. Please do not send any mail responses
to me - I am just an innocent bystander - but directly to the author
of this posting, i.e. to uunet!dunike!onecom!wldrdg!hans. The posting
below may reflect or may not my personal views on a subject.
-mj
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cut here>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The 'Shareware' idea was a good one when it was first proposed. Cheap
distribution combined with free demos. Unfortunately, as more and more
software appeared as shareware, things got out of hand. Every little
utility had a shareware price. If you were used to UNIX at work, you
suddenly wanted 1) a UNIX-like shell, 2) a terminal emulator, 3) a compiler
system, 4) a virus protector, ... each asking $20 to $50. Even simple
stuff like TSR's to change fonts or print a screen were asking for $10 to
$30. If you actually paid for every shareware utility you might
use once in a while, you'd be spending hundreds of dollars. All this for
a home system you just use for fun.
With this in mind, I am proposing a new form of Shareware license.
Instead of one price for any user, the price depends on what you use
the system for. For example, the freeware compiler for the Atari ST
we have written (Sozobon C) might have the following fee structure:
1) Home users (who earn no money with their computers)
$0
2) Shareware authors and those who use their computers as
business tools (writers and accountants for example):
$10
3) Commercial computer companies (software developers or
full time computer consultants for example):
$50
In addition, I am proposing the alternative fee structure "Payment in
Kind" for Shareware authors and Commercial software developers. Users
of Sozobon C which develop products with it can pay the fees above OR
can simply send us 3 copies of their product (or one copy with 3 licenses).
Another way of looking at this proposal is "Payment according to you
philosopy". If you believe in freeware (and all your programs are free),
Sozobon C is free. If you believe in shareware (and always ask for a
fee), we ask you for a fee. If you believe in commertial software (and
ask $50 or more for your product), you owe us $50. Alternatively, we
are willing to trade our software for yours.
What do you think of this idea??
Johann Ruegg
Sozobon Ltd
uunet!dunike!onecom!wldrdg!hans
/* This IS an official statement of Sozobon Ltd */peltz@cerl.uiuc.edu (Steve Peltz) (03/15/90)
In article <637262620.10497@myrias.com> mj@myrias.com (Michal Jaegermann) writes for uunet!dunike!onecom!wldrdg!hans: > >Another way of looking at this proposal is "Payment according to you >philosopy". If you believe in freeware (and all your programs are free), >Sozobon C is free. If you believe in shareware (and always ask for a >fee), we ask you for a fee. If you believe in commertial software (and >ask $50 or more for your product), you owe us $50. Alternatively, we >are willing to trade our software for yours. I like it, but what would someone with the same policy as yours do (I'd guess "trade" would be the reasonable thing). I'm uncomfortable with the whole shareware idea, mostly because it is such a gray area within the copyright laws. I either sell my program outright, retaining full copyright, or allow it to be distributed with no strings attached. The only thing I might ask on a "free" distribution would be that if someone wanted to encourage me to write something else, they could send me something. Most of my benefit from my independent programming has been to generate inquiries from companies interested in me adapting something for their specific needs. I am, in general, supportive of the FSF and their goals, but I am also in general agreement with Peter (if I understand him correctly) that the GPL is too coercive, and I feel that they'd be more effective in carrying out their mission if they'd allow people the option of not subjecting their code to the GPL even if they use some code that is covered, as long as the GPL code is attributed and freely distributed. Of course, I fully acknowledge their right to do whatever they want within the rules we happen to live under. -- Steve Peltz (almost) CFI-G Just say "NO" to drug testing. ---"Monticello traffic, Glider 949 landing 18, full stop"---