fitz@wang.com (Tom Fitzgerald) (02/21/90)
root@polari.UUCP (The Super User) writes: > I run a public access unix system here in Seattle. I pay for the > phone lines & equipment, and I've devoted quite a bit of time to keeping > the system going through thick and thin. and after reading > it, I would like to see an end to shareware distribution via the network. > Usenet is not > free, and by distributing your shareware on it you are destroying any > good will that I might have had towards you. I'm truly impressed. You're claiming that other people should stop using the net for their commercial interests, because it interferes with _you_ using the net for _your_ commercial interests. Even on a net full of arrogant turkeys, this is the most arrogant thing I've seen in a long while. We've seen posting here saying that the net should never be used for commercial services (because it's paid for with other people's money), and posting that say it's OK to use the net for commercial services as long as you contribute to it. Both these attitudes are self-consistent, regardless of which attitude anybody in particular happens to agree with. Your claim that you can use the net for a profit, but that shareware writers cannot, is absurd. If it came down to a choice, I'd rather keep the shareware writers and have the public-access machines kicked off. The shareware writers are contributing stuff that can be used by anyone on the net. You get a profit from your customers without contributing anything yourself. > I pay for advertising my product. You pay for yours. "You" pay, hm? I see this in the latest nixpub posting: 10/89 206-328-4944 polari Seatle WA 3/12 24 Equip ???; 8-lines, Trailblazer on 206-328-1468; $30/year (flat rate); Multi-user games, chat, full USENET. Contact: uunet!microsoft!happym!polari!bruceki The nixpub postings are distributed across the net, so we're paying for your advertising too. If you don't think people should pay for other people's advertising, get your listing out of nixpub. What total hypocrisy. Someone tell me that that article was a forgery. --- Tom Fitzgerald fitz@wang.com Wang Labs ...!uunet!wang!fitz Lowell MA, USA 1-508-967-5278
greenber@utoday.UUCP (Ross M. Greenberg) (02/21/90)
In article <1287@polari.UUCP> root@polari.UUCP (The Super User) writes: > > >I am not particularly entranced with Ross "I follow up every article, >don't you" greenbergs arguments, except to say that if he wants to >advertise his product on my system I'd like to have equal rights in his >magazine! I'm an editor, not the owner or publisher. You want their number for ad space, try calling the main office. My postings here are, obviously, in my name and not in the name of the publication. Don't like my followups? Put me in your kill file. Don't want shareware on your disk? Remove it. -- 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"
root@polari.UUCP (The Super User) (02/22/90)
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.
bstempleton@watmath.waterloo.edu (Brad Templeton) (02/23/90)
People, USENET is not unsolicited in any manner. It's a private club. You can only join it with the permission of another member. You can only join it and subscribe to its data flows through your own explicit acts. It bears no resemblance to a book that the post office leaves on your doorstep. Unmoderated groups are private clubs. Moderated groups are more -- they are edited publications, available at no charge to those who explicitly subscribe. Nobody gets a moderated group without doing something to get it, and except at perhaps some very few sites, no user gets a group without subscribing to it. Moderators decide what should go in their publication, based on what they think the readers wish to see. A moderator of a source/binary group makes a decision as to whether the subscribers want to see shareware. Some moderators on USENET have decided yes, some have decided no. Some of us agree with the YES decision, some agree with the NO. But if you subscribe to a group where the moderator thought yes, don't complain about what you subscribed to. Unsubscribe. USENET is not unsolicited. You're the one who joined it. Start your own group or replace the moderator if you don't like it. -- Brad Templeton, Looking Glass Software, Waterloo, Ont. (519) 884-7473
wayne@dsndata.uucp (Wayne Schlitt) (02/25/90)
In article <1287@polari.UUCP> root@polari.UUCP (The Super User) writes: > I am not particularly entranced with Ross "I follow up every article, > don't you" greenbergs arguments, except to say that if he wants to > advertise his product on my system I'd like to have equal rights in his ^^^ > magazine! ^^^^^^^^^ In article <1294@polari.UUCP> root@polari.UUCP (The Super User) writes: > > I'm not sure what the wang guy's point is. ^^^^^^^^^^ _please_ do not confuse the opinions and statements of individuals with the places they post from. they may or may not work for those companies or attend the schools or whatever. (of course, this has nothing to do with shareware. you may return to your previously scheduled debate.) -wayne
jkimble@nostromo.austin.ibm.com (The Programmer Guy) (02/27/90)
In article <1294@polari.UUCP> root@.UUCP (The Super User) writes: > > 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. I think a better analogy would be more like this: You set up polari with a series of 1-800- numbers so each of us could call and use your system at your expense. If we find that we like using your system, we pay you what we think it's worth (regardless of how much it costs). If we don't like using your system, we don't pay you. Personally, I'm not really all that against the Shareware people because I don't honestly believe they get all that many people sending them money -- especially not in the UNIX enviornment when we're all used to seeing gems such as rn, Configure, perl, and emacs without having to pay a dime! I think the shareware people get about as much out of their efforts as the comp.sources.misc people do: fame. I think the shareware concept was invented so husbands could justify to their wives why they spend countless hours parked in front of non-sexy computers. --Jim Kimble, Yet Another IBM Contractor Phone: 512/823-4479 (work) AIX TCP/IP Development, UUCP: ...!cs.utexas.edu!ibmaus!jkimble Austin, TX 78758 Austin: jkimble@nostromo "ALPO is 99 cents a can. That's almost SEVEN dog dollars!"
doug@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Douglas W O'neal) (02/28/90)
In article <34557@watmath.waterloo.edu> bstempleton@watmath.waterloo.edu (Brad Templeton) writes:
->People, USENET is not unsolicited in any manner. It's a private club.
->You can only join it with the permission of another member. You can
->only join it and subscribe to its data flows through your own
->explicit acts. It bears no resemblance to a book that the post office
->leaves on your doorstep.
Funny, I seem to remember going out and *buying* a mailbox and erecting it
according to post office regulations. Does that mean that my mail is no
longer unsolicited and people can now send me things through the US mails
and demand payment? Putting up the mailbox was certainly an explicit act
to allow the mail to reach me.
--
Doug O'Neal Distributed Systems Programmer
Homewood Academic Computing doug@jhuvms.bitnet, doug@jhuvms.hcf.jhu.edu
Johns Hopkins University mimsy!aplcen!jhunix!doug val@swamps.UUCP (Val Christian) (03/07/90)
In article <4349@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU> doug@jhuvms.bitnet (Douglas Wal) writes: > In article <34557@watmath.waterloo.edu> bstempleton@watmath.waterloo.edu (Brad Templeton) writes: > ->People, USENET is not unsolicited in any manner. It's a private club. > ->You can only join it with the permission of another member. You can > ->only join it and subscribe to its data flows through your own > ->explicit acts. It bears no resemblance to a book that the post office > ->leaves on your doorstep. > Funny, I seem to remember going out and *buying* a mailbox and erecting it > according to post office regulations. Does that mean that my mail is no > longer unsolicited and people can now send me things through the US mails > and demand payment? Putting up the mailbox was certainly an explicit act > to allow the mail to reach me. True, this was an explicit act, similar to getting an account on a UNIX system, which also allows mail to reach you. HOWEVER, in order to get netnews, you also have to type "rn" or "readnews", and then subscribe to the specific groups you want to read. THAT is like subscribing to a paper or a magazine, and THAT'S why netnews is NOT unsolicited. -- Wolf N. Paul, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis Schloss Laxenburg, Schlossplatz 1, A - 2361 Laxenburg, Austria, Europe Phone: [43] (2236) 71521-465 BITNET: tuvie!iiasa!wnp@cernvax.BITNET UUCP: uunet!tuvie!iiasa!wnp INTERNET: wnp%iiasa.at@uunet.uu.net
sean@ms.uky.edu (Sean Casey) (03/08/90)
val@swamps.UUCP (Val Christian) writes: |True, this was an explicit act, similar to getting an account on a UNIX |system, which also allows mail to reach you. HOWEVER, in order to get |netnews, you also have to type "rn" or "readnews", and then subscribe |to the specific groups you want to read. THAT is like subscribing to |a paper or a magazine, and THAT'S why netnews is NOT unsolicited. What a silly argument. -- *** Sean Casey sean@ms.uky.edu, sean@ukma.bitnet, ukma!sean *** "Well, heck's farr, Jim, it gives mah computer sumthin' to do when *** Ah'm out brandin' capacitors." -DM
coolidge@casca.cs.uiuc.edu (John Coolidge) (03/08/90)
val@swamps.UUCP (Val Christian) writes: >True, this was an explicit act, similar to getting an account on a UNIX >system, which also allows mail to reach you. HOWEVER, in order to get >netnews, you also have to type "rn" or "readnews", and then subscribe >to the specific groups you want to read. THAT is like subscribing to >a paper or a magazine, and THAT'S why netnews is NOT unsolicited. A closer analogy is one between running rn and opening your mailbox door. You're (at least with most newsreaders) subscribed to _everything_ by default. Netnews is more like a paper-mail mailing list than anything else. By joining USENET, you put yourself on a very large mailing list with lots of topics. What people choose to send to that mailing list is their problem; all you did was get on the list. You've solicited a place on that list, not all of the individual traffic (submitted _after_ your request, BTW, and therefore not something you could have requested in advance). If you voluntarily added yourself to, say, Byte's mailing list, and then someone with access to Byte's mailing list sent you a toaster in the mail and said "if you use this toaster, send me money", you'd be completely justified in keeping the toaster and telling the sender to shove off. The analogy with USENET should be obvious... --John -------------------------------------------------------------------------- John L. Coolidge Internet:coolidge@cs.uiuc.edu UUCP:uiucdcs!coolidge Of course I don't speak for the U of I (or anyone else except myself) Copyright 1990 John L. Coolidge. Copying allowed if (and only if) attributed. You may redistribute this article if and only if your recipients may as well.
dalenber@cbnewsc.ATT.COM (Russel Dalenberg) (03/08/90)
In article <206@swamps.UUCP> val@swamps.UUCP (Val Christian) writes: | In article <4349@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU> doug@jhuvms.bitnet (Douglas Wal) writes: |> In article <34557@watmath.waterloo.edu> bstempleton@watmath.waterloo.edu (Brad Templeton) writes: |> ->People, USENET is not unsolicited in any manner. It's a private club. |> -> . . . It bears no resemblance to a book that the post office |> ->leaves on your doorstep. |> Funny, I seem to remember going out and *buying* a mailbox and erecting it |> according to post office regulations. Does that mean that my mail is no |> longer unsolicited and people can now send me things through the US mails |> and demand payment? Putting up the mailbox was certainly an explicit act |> to allow the mail to reach me. | | True, this was an explicit act, similar to getting an account on a UNIX | system, which also allows mail to reach you. HOWEVER, in order to get | netnews, you also have to type "rn" or "readnews", and then subscribe | to the specific groups you want to read. THAT is like subscribing to | a paper or a magazine, and THAT'S why netnews is NOT unsolicited. No, using "rn" or any other newsreader is like looking in your physical mailbox for mail. Are you saying that since I must make an effort to get my mail from the mailbox each day, the junk mail I am sent is *not* unsolicited? What rubbish. Russel Dalenberg att!ihlpb!dalenber dalenber@ihlpb.att.com Disclaimer: These are my opinions, not AT&T's
seanf@sco.COM (Sean Fagan) (03/09/90)
In article <206@swamps.UUCP> val@swamps.UUCP (Val Christian) writes: >True, this was an explicit act, similar to getting an account on a UNIX >system, which also allows mail to reach you. HOWEVER, in order to get >netnews, you also have to type "rn" or "readnews", and then subscribe >to the specific groups you want to read. THAT is like subscribing to >a paper or a magazine, and THAT'S why netnews is NOT unsolicited. No, it's more like opening a package that was delivered to you. Unless you are the sysadm, you made not motion, external to the system (your house, in the USPS analogy) to get "the stuff." When you subscribe to a newspaper, you fill out forms or call the paper; when you subscribe to a newsgroup, you just type a seemingly-random bunch of characters, somewhat akin to opening a box or envelope. Or are you arguing that, if someone sends you source code to System V UNIX, you should also be fined the, what, $50000 / copy? Or better, if it gets posted to comp.sources.d, then everybody who reads the group should have their belongings confiscated by the FBI (sorry; I've been reading comp.dcom.telecom, and getting paranoid 8-))? -- Sean Eric Fagan | "Time has little to do with infinity and jelly donuts." seanf@sco.COM | -- Thomas Magnum (Tom Selleck), _Magnum, P.I._ (408) 458-1422 | Any opinions expressed are my own, not my employers'.