[comp.sources.d] Can the author refuse to share shareware?

silvert@dalcs.UUCP (04/07/87)

Comments requested on the following problem.  I installed arc on several
machines, including the unix engine I use at work.  Since it is a
government lab, I tried to send in the requested $35 (US) license fee to
System Enhancement Associates.  It created no end of confusion in our
finance department, sending money for a product that we already had!
But SEA has apparently refused to license our system, on the grounds
that arc doesn't run on it!

I plan to continue using arc, and I will be happy to pay the requested
fee to SEA, but I have never heard of anyone trying to pay for shareware
and being refused.  Raises an interesting question about software
rights, doesn't it?
-- 
Bill Silvert, Modelling/Statistics Group
Bedford Institute of Oceanography, Dartmouth, NS, Canada
CDN or BITNET: silvert@cs.dal.cdn	-- UUCP: ..!{seismo|utai}!dalcs!silvert
ARPA: silvert%dalcs.uucp@seismo.CSS.GOV	-- CSNET: silvert%cs.dal.cdn@ubc.csnet

mark@markshome.UUCP (04/08/87)

I suppose the reason for refusing a shareware fee is pretty clear--namely
that the author of the software thinks that it is too difficult to
support on the system on which you are claiming to run it, and once
the author accepts the shareware fee a relationship is created between
buyer and seller which gives the buyer certain rights (for instance,
to sue.)

So I suppose one of the real questions is: can you continue to run the
software if you have tried to pay the shareware fee and been refused?
Was part of the fee-refusal a request to cease running the shareware?

Lots of interesting new law here.

-mark

I'm reminded of the (mythical?) 'legal tender' case law, which supposedly
says that if you attempt to pay for something with 'legal tender'
(e.g. dollars in the U.S.A.), and your money is not accepted, then
by making the offer you have gone as far as you need to, and you may now
walk off with the item(!).

Spoken: Mark Weiser 	ARPA:	mark@mimsy.umd.edu	Phone: +1-301-454-7817
After May 1, 1987: weiser@xerox.com

ken@rochester.UUCP (04/08/87)

|I'm reminded of the (mythical?) 'legal tender' case law, which supposedly
|says that if you attempt to pay for something with 'legal tender'
|(e.g. dollars in the U.S.A.), and your money is not accepted, then
|by making the offer you have gone as far as you need to, and you may now
|walk off with the item(!).

It may be mythical. As I understand the law, by advertising, the
merchant is asking for offers to buy (or whatever the legal jargon is).
By waving the money in front of the merchant one is making an offer.
The merchant reserves the right to decline to sell. No contract has
been entered.

Don't take my word for it. Anybody know better? Maybe switch the
newsgroups too?

	Ken

mjranum@gouldsd.UUCP (04/09/87)

In article <26833@rochester.ARPA>, ken@rochester.ARPA (Ken Yap) writes:
> |I'm reminded of the (mythical?) 'legal tender' case law, which supposedly
> |says that if you attempt to pay for something with 'legal tender'
> |(e.g. dollars in the U.S.A.), and your money is not accepted, then
> |by making the offer you have gone as far as you need to, and you may now
> |walk off with the item(!).
> 
	So if I go to a store with 100$ in cash and offer it for a Mercedes
Benz, I can now walk off with the item ? Gee, I love capitalism !

	Seriously, though, as far as I know you're fine. Most shareware says
something to the effect of 'if you like this you CAN send XX$ to.. etc'.
Check to see if it says 'must send' or 'can send'...

--mjr()

-- 
Copyright, 1987 -  Anarchist Software Foundation - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
In reproducing this document in any form, the licensee (you) agrees to
pay the ASF  5$/copy distributed,  and to admit that software law is a
subject better left for lawyers and slimy nerds.    Live Free or die !

dennis@wolf.UUCP (04/11/87)

In article <487@gouldsd.UUCP>, mjranum@gouldsd.UUCP (Marcus J Ranum) writes:
> 	So if I go to a store with 100$ in cash and offer it for a Mercedes
> Benz, I can now walk off with the item ? Gee, I love capitalism !


Well, I do believe that the legal tender law only applies to debts.  For 
instance, say you entered into a binding contract to pay a dealer for a 
Benz that you financed.  If you tried to give him cash to pay off the 
financing and he refused, the debt is cancelled.  If you don't have a contract,
i.e. you just walked in and offered cash, then the legal tender thing doesn't
apply.
-- 
                                 Dennis Lou

                   {ihnp4   sdcsvax} jack!wolf!dennis

andrew@tcom.stc.co.uk (Andrew Macpherson) (04/18/87)

In article <289@wolf.UUCP> dennis@wolf.UUCP (Dennis Lou) writes:
| In article <487@gouldsd.UUCP>, mjranum@gouldsd.UUCP (Marcus J Ranum) writes:
| > 	So if I go to a store with 100$ in cash and offer it for a Mercedes
| > Benz, I can now walk off with the item ? Gee, I love capitalism !
| 
| 
| Well, I do believe that the legal tender law only applies to debts.  For 
| instance, say you entered into a binding contract to pay a dealer for a 
| Benz that you financed.  If you tried to give him cash to pay off the 
| financing and he refused, the debt is cancelled.  If you don't have a contract,
| i.e. you just walked in and offered cash, then the legal tender thing doesn't
| apply.
| -- 

I think you are all missing the point:  an advertised price on a shelf in
the store/window of a car etc is 'an invitation to treat'.  You then approach
the owner, or his agent, and say that you are willing to make a purchase
at the posted price (or of course make any other OFFER).  If this 'offer'
is accepted you then have a contract, and it is at this point that the
legal tender bit comes in... Presenting a twenty note for a 1 {cent,pence}
item, and being answered with "I don't want that" (rather than "I can't make
change for that") is reasonable cause to pick up the item, walk out the store
and wait for the store to call for the police to explain the law to them :-)
(in the UK anyway, it might be riskier in America :-()

As with most things, I read this in a girlfriend's text-book, but a/ I
may have mis-remembered, b/ even if I didn't you are not paying me for
this opinion, I refuse to be held liable for more than I am being paid
for it.
-- 
Regards,
	Andrew Macpherson.  <andrew@tcom.stc.co.uk>  {backbone}!ukc!stc!andrew