fair@well.UUCP (01/12/87)
Volume 4, Number 1 5 January 1987
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
| _ |
| / \ |
| /|oo \ |
| - FidoNews - (_| /_) |
| _`@/_ \ _ |
| International | | \ \\ |
| FidoNet Association | (*) | \ )) |
| Newsletter ______ |__U__| / \// |
| / FIDO \ _//|| _\ / |
| (________) (_/(_|(____/ |
| (jm) |
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
Editor in Chief: Thom Henderson
Chief Procrastinator Emeritus: Tom Jennings
FidoNews is the official newsletter of the International FidoNet
Association, and is published weekly by SEAdog Leader, node 1/1.
You are encouraged to submit articles for publication in
FidoNews. Article submission standards are contained in the file
ARTSPEC.DOC, available from node 1/1.
Copyright (C) 1986, by the International FidoNet Association.
All rights reserved. Duplication and/or distribution permitted
for noncommercial purposes only. For use in other circumstances,
please contact IFNA.
HAPPY NEW YEAR
Table of Contents
1. EDITORIAL
Shareware is Nowhere
2. ARTICLES
Curbing Copyright Abuses by Vendors and On-Line Services
3. NOTICES
The Interrupt Stack
Fidonews Page 2 5 Jan 1987
=================================================================
EDITORIAL
=================================================================
Shareware is Nowhere
I'm sure many of you have read at least a few of my diatribes
about shareware. How many of you listened? Quite a number, I'm
sure, but apparently not enough.
Quite simply put, shareware is dying out. The signs are all
around us.
o PC Outline was originally released as shareware, and was even
reviewed by PC Week as being better than its non-shareware
competition. But the last I heard was that it's now being
marketed by Brown Bag Software.
o Chris Dunford wrote an elegant command editor for DOS called
CED (and no, Chris's middle initial is not "E"). Almost anyone
"in the know" about PC's uses CED. It was originally released
as shareware. The latest version is called PCED, and is not
shareware.
o One of the more popular data base programs for the PC is
PC-File, a shareware product of Buttonware, Inc. Buttonware
has now released a new version of PC-File that is, among other
things, relational. It is also not shareware any more.
o Bob Hartman has written all sorts of little goodies for FidoNet
sysops, including Rovermsg and Renum. These were released as
shareware. Bob reports that the total contributions received
so far wouldn't buy him and his wife dinner out. Bob is now
writing a faster and more powerful alternative to EchoMail.
And guess what? It ain't gonna be shareware.
o The Headlands Press started the whole shareware phenomenon with
its famous PC Talk communications program. They've announced
that they're coming out with a new version, and even THAT won't
be shareware any longer!
I could go on and on. The examples abound. But your own boards
provide the best proof of all. When was the last time you saw a
really good shareware product come out that wasn't crippled in
some way?
Sometimes the crippling isn't that bad. For example, the Instant
Recall database manager in its shareware version will handle an
80k database, but if you pay the fee you get a NON-shareware
version that'll handle a 2 meg database. Other examples include
FansiConsole, which comes in a fully functional form, but you
have to pay to get the manual before you can figure out how to
use it. Then there are Ron Bemis's multitudinous FidoNet
utilities that send home notes to papa until you pay for a
Fidonews Page 3 5 Jan 1987
registered version.
But still, a cripple is a cripple. One way or another, almost
all shareware these days is either crippled so you can't use it
all, or does something you don't like, or isn't all that good to
begin with. (Note that I said ALMOST all! There are always
exceptions.)
And who's fault is it? Is it the authors' fault? Not at all.
Your average software author quite rightly feels that he deserves
to be compensated for his work. After a few all nighters chasing
one more bug or nailing down one more feature, almost anyone will
start to wonder why they're doing all this for nothing in return.
No, it's YOUR fault, unless you happen to be one of the
statistical few who actually pays for all the shareware you use.
Shareware was a noble experiment in trusting the users, and now
it's almost over. For a couple of years now shareware authors
have been telling you that if you didn't shell out for what you
use, then pretty soon you'd stop seeing a cheap bounty of good
software. By all appearances, nobody really believed that
prediction, so now it's coming to pass.
Enjoy shareware while it lasts. It won't last long.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Fidonews Page 4 5 Jan 1987
=================================================================
ARTICLES
=================================================================
Curbing Copyright Abuses by Vendors and On-Line Services
Date: October 18, 1986
From: Mark J. Welch, Shareware author
(The Generic Adventure Game System)
P.O. Box 2409, San Francisco, CA 94126
Voice (415) 845-2430 [Berkeley]
Fido 161/459 [private, Seadog]
BIX 'mwelch'
Outline: I. CompuServe
II. PC-SIG
III. Pink Panther Data Systems
IV. Where To Go (for more discussion of the issues)
Recently, several unrelated disputes have raised the issue of
Shareware authors' rights. I'd like to summarize some of the
issues, and point people to where other discussions are also
going on. Please note that all text not in quotes is written by
me. -mjw
I. CompuServe
CompuServe Information Services (an H&R Block Company)
P.O. Box 20212
5000 Arlington Centre Blvd.
Columbus, OH 43220
(800) 848-8199
(614) 457-0802
For a long time, CompuServe (CIS) has claimed copyright to
certain portions of its download libraries. Recently, a dispute
between CompuServe and a BBS operator resulted in an article
inInfoWorld that has sparked a debate over the legitimacy of
CompuServe's claims.
Apparently, the dispute arose because the BBS operator was
downloading programs from CIS and posting them on his bulletin-
board system, which either required or requested a fee for
subscribers. The following seven paragraphs of text are from a
now-widely-distributed message from Neil Shapiro, Sysop of
MAUG(tm) on CompuServe:
"1) CompuServe received a complaint from the author of a
Fidonews Page 5 5 Jan 1987
copyrighted program that his program was being published by
Sande's Mousetrap BBS without the author's permission. The
author also indicated that Sande had many other non-Public
Domain programs on his BBS."
"2) CIS asked me to call the BBS and verify the author's
complaint. Sande's short bulletin (signed with his nom de
plume of "Captain Mac") specifically stated that Sande was
going onto GEnie, CompuServe and Delphi every week to
download all of their files and that if you sent him $25 to
join his service there was no longer any need to join any of
the networks. His short bulletin did not state he was
downloading public-domain files but said all files and
specifically stated commercial redistribution.
"3) At the same point in time Sande left a message on MAUG(tm)
also stating that all files (not just public-domain) were
being offered on his BBS. I deleted that message and sent
him an EMAIL reply explaining that many of our files were
copyrighted by authors and that it was unethical to take
such files without the authors' permission.
"4) CIS' lawyers sent Sande a note which did NOT ask him to
close his BBS but simply asked that he cease the illegal
acts above.
"5) Sande left many messages on such networks as FidoNET
claiming that CIS had told him to close his BBS and that it
was public-domain files that were at issue. This is simply a
misleading statement. CIS did not ask him to close his
board. The files at issue were copyrighted files which CIS
had received author complaints over.
"6) It is important to keep in mind that Sande's BBS was a
commercial venture. it is also important to keep in mind
that Sande specifically stated in his short bulletin that he
was making network compilations of data available
commercially.
"7) CompuServe and MAUG are not attempting to "threaten" any BBS
system. BBS systems are the heart and soul of
telecommunications. But the sysop of a BBS must operate
within certain ethical and legal guidelines. One of these,
as should be obvious, is that you do not use a copyrighted
file without the permission of the author."
A public message (on FidoNet's IFNA echomail conference) about
the controversy, from someone who spoke to Shapiro by phone
included this summary:
"A 'shoot from the hip' analysis of our conversation yields
the observation that CIS is not trying to copyright all the
stuff on their system, just trying to protect software that
does not give permission for public distribution. Another
educational insight to this thing is to realize how easy it
Fidonews Page 6 5 Jan 1987
is to get things bent out of shape on a telecom
network....Also, the sysop who was the object of the CIS
threat was way out of line in his behaviour and probably
deserved what he got. It was a definite case of violation of
copyright laws (remember the phone book analogy...)."
At least one FidoNet message suggested that users boycott
CompuServe for some amount of time; other suggested that the
Fido BBS software not be allowed on-line on CompuServe if the
service would claim any copyright ownership to it as a result.
The controversy did have one effect: several Shareware software
authors began doing their homework on protecting their legal
rights (see section IV, below). Rather agressive discussions
also started about the topic on virtually every electronic
service and many BBSs.
I had my own minor dispute with CompuServe a while back: I spent
45 minutes uploading GAGS to the service, and the file was lost.
I was charged for the connect time, and decided not to try
again. Later, I decided to allow CompuServe to post it, and gave
them permission to do so. I don't know if it's still on-line; if
it is, it's most likely a very, very old version.
Needless to say, CompuServe does not own copyright to GAGS,
either. Its responses to the recent dispute make it clear that
people can download a few programs from CIS and upload them to
other BBSs without any legal problems, provided that the
programs' authors allow such redistribution. If anyone hears
differently, please let me know.
=========================
II. PC-SIG
Personal Computer Software Interest Group
1030-D East Duane Ave., Sunnyvale, CA 94086
(408) 730-9291; orders (800) 245-6717, (800) 222-2996 CA
[earlier articles on this PC-SIG issue appeared in FidoNews #336
and #338.]
PC-SIG may sound like the name of a computer users group,
but it's not. PC-SIG is a privately-held, for-profit
corporation engaged in the business of selling public-
domain and Shareware programs on disks. They charge a fixed
fee of $6 each for each disk, plus $4 shipping per order. There
are over 500 disks in the PC-SIG library. PC-SIG advertises in
many national and regional computer publications (including
BYTE, PC, and InfoWorld). Another recent discovery for me is
that PC-SIG is in the complete distribution business now. Not
Fidonews Page 7 5 Jan 1987
only do they sell disks by mail order and at trade shows, but
they have "authorized dealers" in the US and even overseas.
My understanding is that the company is owned by Richard
Peterson, who is also president. I have also spoken with Hazel
Peterson, general manager, and Tom Yarr, vice-president of
marketing. PC-SIG's lawyer is Thomas Caudill, 1025 North Fourth
St., San Jose, 95112-4942, (408) 298-4844.
Shareware authors may recall that in its early days, PC-SIG
didn't take much care in compiling its library of public-
domain and Shareware titles. Author's titles would be added
to the library without permission, and in some cases
despite clear requirements that permission had to be
requested.
For a while, it seemed as if they'd cleaned up their act, by
getting permissions and paying at least lip service to the idea
that Shareware authors should get contributions. But I believe
that several recent actions by PC-SIG are having very serious
adverse effects on Shareware authors.
The first action brought to my attention was the letter sent out
by PC-SIG to vendors whom it believed were improperly using its
name and disk numbering scheme. After selling its printed
directory through bookstores and allowing other vendors and user
groups to use its numbering scheme for several years, PC-SIG now
says it will sue anyone who uses the same numbering scheme or,
apparently, mentions their name in any way (other than in a
disclaimer).
PC-SIG has filed one legal action so far, according to its
attorney: a million-dollar lawsuit against now-defunct National
Public Domain Software (Santa Clara Superior Court, Case no.
605640). A letter from NPDS's proprietor, Paul Jones, says that
the suit drove them out of business.
I have no problem with PC-SIG's interest in protecting its name.
However, their method of doing so is at best misleading, and at
worst deliberately calculated to damage the rights of shareware
authors. [If anyone would like a copy of any of these letters,
please contact me.]
In a nine-page threatening letter sent by PC-SIG to several
vendors, PC-SIG's attorney makes a number of statements that by
themselves threaten shareware authors' copyright and trademark
rights:
1. Three times in the letter, Caudill claims that all of
the programs in the PC-SIG library are in the public
domain. Nowhere in the letter is there any
acknowledgement that most of the programs' authors
retain copyright ownership. This sort of claim, if
repeated, has the effect of diluting Shareware authors'
rights. [In an Oct. 13 letter to this author, Caudill said
Fidonews Page 8 5 Jan 1987
this claim "was made in error" and that future letters
would correct the wording, but did not address my request
that he send a correction letter to earlier recipients.]
2. Three times in the letter, PC-SIG claims copyright
ownership of all the disks in the library. The overbroad
claim in the letter, however, seems to order the recipient
to stop distributing the programs, not just the programs in
the same order PC-SIG puts them. [Caudill's Oct. 13 letter
to this author says that the intent is only to claim
copyright on PC-SIG's directory disks, and that vendors
receiving the letter would not be confused. I disagree.]
3. PC-SIG also claims, in the letter, that the recipient
cannot use the same disk names and titles as PC-SIG, as the
disk names are copyrights (trademarks?) of PC-SIG. [In the
Oct. 13 letter, Caudill concedes that PC-SIG does not claim
ownership rights to the titles, except when used in
conjunction with PC-SIG's copyrighted numbering system.]
4. The letter also implies that the program authors somehow
work for or with PC-SIG; this is unnerving not just
because I allow many vendors, user groups and BBSs to
distribute GAGS, but because it implies an affiliation
that may lead buyers to assume that PC-SIG has paid the
authors for the programs somehow, thus reducing the
likelihood of anyone ever sending me money. (I've
received many registrations, including some from people
who bought GAGS from other vendors: no one has ever
registered after buying GAGS from PC-SIG.) [Caudill's Oct.
13 letter says that the general tone of the vendor letters
negate this effect, but he agreed to put a note in future
letters saying that PC-SIG has no proprietary rights in the
disks it sells.]
5. In the letter, PC-SIG also claims that it can collect
the damages provided in the US Copyright Act, which implies
that they have registered the disks. I was assured by PC-
SIG owner Richard Peterson that the firm has not, in fact,
registered the disks. (Of course, that means that the list
of damages is simply a bluff that cannot be asked for.)
[Mr. Caudill's Oct. 13 letter rebuts this, claiming that
PC-SIG has, in fact, registered the disks.]
Why is PC-SIG Doing This?
-------------------------
Now, as I noted above, I can't object to PC-SIG's legitimate
interest in protecting its name and its directory. However,
when I read the letter and talked to other Shareware disk
vendors, it wasn't clear whether PC-SIG's goal was to protect
its rights or to drive its competitors out of business.
PC-SIG is using the money it has made selling MY SOFTWARE to
Fidonews Page 9 5 Jan 1987
drive other vendors out of business, thus limiting the overall
potential of this distribution channel. These other vendors, in
many cases, are individuals who can't afford to hire a lawyer.
The most offensive fact is that PC-SIG's letter simply tramples
on my legal rights. One vendor, who had obtained my permission
to distribute GAGS, pulled it (and other programs) from his
library after receiving PC-SIG's overbroad letter. It's back in
the library, but both that vendor and I lost sales as a result
of PC-SIG's excessive aggression. If other vendors pull my disk
or go out of business because of PC-SIG's letter, I lose money
so that PC-SIG can have a bigger share of a smaller
marketplace.
Of course, if this one letter were the only problem with PC-
SIG, I'd not be so worked up.
But GAGS originally made its way into the PC-SIG library before
I gave permission. Luckily for them, I had decided to let them
distribute it before I found out that it was in the library. I
gave them permission, and notified them of each update. They
never sent me anything. PC-SIG completely ignored my update
notices, instead insisting four months later, when I called
them, that I had to mail them the update free in order to get
the new versions into the library. (What a great idea: their
cost of goods is ZERO. They buy disks for 39 cents and sell
them for $6 each, with no costs in between.)
Other authors' programs have found their way into the PC-SIG
library without permission, and in at least one case was sold
despite a clear disclaimer in the program stating that for-
profit vendors like PC-SIG could not distribute it. (This
latter incident speaks well for PC-SIG's claim that it screens
every program carefully.)
PC-SIG's CD-ROM Disk:
---------------------
A few weeks ago, I discovered that PC-SIG had included GAGS on
its new CD-ROM disk it is selling, in direct violation of the
permission letter I gave them. Again, it never occurred to them
to even write me a letter asking for a change to my permission
letter. [Caudill's Oct. 13 letter claims that PC-SIG's sale of
the CD-ROM disk does not violate my license, which permits
sales of any disk for which they charge $8 or less. His letter
does not mention that the CD-ROM disk sells for $195, which my
calculator program emphatically says is much more than $8.]
Lip Service to Shareware authors:
---------------------------------
Last month, at the PC-Faire in San Francisco, I picked up PC-
SIG's catalog update/newsletter at their huge booth. In the
Fidonews Page 10 5 Jan 1987
catalog comes yet another slap in the face. I expect companies
like PC-SIG to make a good-faith effort to encourage buyers to
pay for their disks. Instead, the firm's newsletter seems to
suggest that Shareware authors make megabucks, and don't need
Shareware contributions. A direct quote:
"Q: Do the authors who ask for a donation or contribution
really make money?
A: The high end of scale for people using the Open Software
concept to distribute their software is $1.5 million to
$2.5 million a year. My estimate is that the average
developer earns about $40,000 to $50,000 a year per
program. Others make less than $500 a year."
I must disagree, Mr. Peterson: the average Shareware author
probably sits a lot closer to your $500 figure. The only folks
I know who have such large grosses are folks like Bob Wallace
and Jim Button, who also run expensive marketing campaigns. If
the average author makes $40,000 per program, I'll eat a floppy
disk. The effect of such a quote is to make buyers think
there's no need to pay Shareware authors, since they already do
so well.
It looks to me as if most of the money being made in Shareware
is going into PC-SIG's bank account. By itself, that's not too
upsetting: I decided to distribute GAGS as Shareware, knowing
that vendors like PC-SIG may make more money than I.
But I never expected any company to start firing a gun at the
authors who are necessary to its very existence.
PC-SIG Conclusion:
------------------
In my first (September 19) letter to PC-SIG regarding these
matters, I asked PC-SIG to send a retraction of its vendor to
everyone who received it, and demanded that GAGS (my shareware
program, the Generic Adventure Game System) be removed from the
illegal CD-ROM version of the PC-SIG library. I also demanded
payment for the copies illegally distributed.
Mr. Caudill's October 13 reply conceded some points, and agreed
to change future letters, but did not address my request for a
correction letter. He also said that their CD-ROM distribution
of GAGS is legal, but agreed to "pull" it from the next version
of the disk.
My October 15 reply to Mr. Caudill and Mr. Peterson did several
things: it revokes PC-SIG's license to distribute GAGS,
effective November 1, 1986; it requests again that a correction
letter be sent; it demands that PC-SIG pay for illegally
distributed copies of GAGS; and requests a written apology for
the firm's improper conduct.
Fidonews Page 11 5 Jan 1987
=============================
III. Pink Panther Data Systems
Pink Panther Data Systems
Richard E. Andrew
P.O. Box 271098
Escondido, CA 92027-0732
Pink Panther is a tiny, nearly insignificant vendor, compared
to PC-SIG. However, I recently discovered that they are even
more discourteous.
About two months ago, I noticed their booth at a computer swap
meet here in Northern California. I looked in the catalog and
noticed that GAGS was in their library; I knew they had not
asked for permission, so I asked to speak to the person in
charge.
I informed Mr. Andrews that GAGS cannot be distributed by any
for-profit vendor unless the vendor writes and requests my
written permission. He agreed to pull the disk from the
library, and to write and ask for my permission.
Two weeks later, I again saw the company exhibiting at a show,
and again discovered that they were selling GAGS. Mr. Andrews
said that he'd been busy and thus unable to write a letter
asking for permission, and that he'd put the disk back in the
library by accident.
I told him that I was quite displeased with his actions, and
would send him a letter to that effect, but pointed out that if
he wished to distribute GAGS, I would grant permission on
receipt of a written request. I sent him my usual firm-but-
polite letter asking that he either stop distributing my
program or remove it from his library, and demanding a written
reply within 20 days.
He wrote back, saying that he had not actually sold any copies
of GAGS, that he has removed it from the library, and that he
thought I was being too protective of my program. He didn't ask
for permission to distribute it.
Why am I upset?
---------------
Mr. Andrews' reply letter suggested that my actions in
"fervently defending" my rights will reduce overall
distribution of GAGS and hence my own income. I agree with the
former but not the latter. By requiring that for-profit
enterprises obtain my written permission before distributing
GAGS, I can provide updates and information more efficiently,
Fidonews Page 12 5 Jan 1987
rather than trusting to "word of mouth." I am also better able
to check that such vendors are complying with the rules.
Mr. Andrews' letter also suggested that I was "totally barring"
distribution of GAGS by commercial libraries. He's wrong: any
such enterprises that obtain written permission and agree to
the terms in Appendix C of the GAGS manual may distribute GAGS.
Many firms have done so, and I have never yet refused
permission, though I might in some cases.
The following is taken directly from my reply to Mr. Andrews:
"One main point seems to have escaped many commercial vendors
of 'user-supported' software. Such vendors are responsible, as
is any publisher, for obtaining legal rights to distribute
these programs. Getting such permission is a cost of doing
business, and in fact is one of relatively few costs that exist
in [that] particular business.
"A few years ago, I worked for an academic book publisher. For
each quote or excerpt by an author, we obtained written
permission from the copyright owner. It took us hundreds of
hours to do this for a typical book. Such permission was almost
always free and gladly given. Had we not obtained permission,
there would be no great financial loss to the original
publisher or author. Indeed, the quote increases sales of the
original work. But refusal to seek permission would be a breach
of common courtesy. It is also illegal.
"Refusal to seek the permission of shareware authors also shows
a lack of common courtesy, and a lack of respect for the law."
=================================
IV. Where To Go (for more discussion of shareware rights)
The discussion of these issues has sparked several developments.
RIGHTS Echomail
---------------
First, a new FidoNet "Echomail" conference has been started to
discuss the issues. The EchoMail area is called "RIGHTS" and is
being coordinated by Steve Butler (138/3), Rob Barker (138/34
aka 17/0) and Tracy Graves (138/39), all of Tacoma, WA. It has
already been picked up in the Austin, Texas area, and will
probably be available soon on many more Fido BBSs around the
country. (Echomail conferences periodically "echo" messages to
each other, so each discussion has many more participants than
a single BBS could support.)
Fidonews Page 13 5 Jan 1987
The CompuServe issue was also widely discussed in the IFNA, and
apparently the SYSOPS, Echomail conferences.
According to a widely-distributed message, the RIGHTS echomail
conference will discuss: "Who has what programs on the $ervices
for which they were the authors? What steps WILL we take to
protect our ability to distribute PD programs, Shareware, etc?
What contacts do we have (collectively) in the Publishing
Industry? What contacts do we have on state and federal
legislatures? Who is willing to do some legwork to define
exactly what our exposure is (legally) along the lines of
routines from: CompuServe, PC Magazine, CL Publications, etc.
"We don't want a bitch session. We want those who are willing
to act based on a collective, well thought out plan of action.
Plan the action for step #6. Freedom of authors to distribute
their handiwork as they desire. Freedom of BBS systems to have
available PD, Shareware, User supported, etc. programs for
download in accordance with the authors wishes -- not somebody
elses money scheme what protection do sysops need from users
uploading known copyrighted (ie, not for distribution by BBS)
software...."
Probus International, Puyallup, WA (206) 848-9232 (138/3)
Arctic Net, Steilacoom, WA (206) 581-7003 (138/34)
Computer Coach, Tacoma, WA (206) 565-1476 (138/39)
Other On-Line Discussions
-------------------------
In addition to FidoNet, there have been some discussions on BIX
(the Byte [magazine] Information Exchange), and of course on
CompuServe. Both are fee-based information services, charging
for connect time. For informaton on CompuServe, call the toll-
free number mentioned in (I) above. To get onto BIX, see any
recent issue of BYTE magazine or call (800) 277-BYTE or (603)
924-7681.
FidoNews
--------
I doubt I'll be only one to discuss this issue in FidoNews,
which is the electronically-distributed newsletter for Fido BBS
sysops. It's available from many Fido BBSs, and is edited by
Thom Henderson (yes, the co-author of ARC and Seadog), who can
be reached at Fido node 1/1 (somewhere in New Jersey). Another
Fido newsletter is the Net 161 Nooseletter, coordinated by
Butch Walker at Fido nodes 161/1 through 161/4. I'm sure there
are other newsletters as well; if any contain discussions of
these issues, I'd like to hear about them.
IFNA
----
The International Fido New Association is a non-profit
Fidonews Page 14 5 Jan 1987
organization of Fido Sysops. It will apparently soon become the
distribution arm through which commercial copies of Fido can be
purchased, and will also be doing work on behalf of Fido
sysops, possibly including legal help. Ken Kaplan, Ben Baker,
Thom Henderson, and Tom Jennings are probably the best people
to get information from on IFNA. Of course, there's also an
IFNA echomail conference on many Fido BBSs nationwide.
Legal Help
----------
Shareware authors are well advised to investigate their legal
rights before they begin distributing their programs, if they
wish to retain copyright ownership.
I've not read it, but several people have suggested the book
"Legal Care for Your Software," which "goes into all sorts of
detail for copyrights, selling of marketing rights, royalties,
etc.," according to a public Fido message. I believe it's
published by Nolo Press, 950 Parker St., Berkeley, CA 94710,
(415) 549-1976.
There are other books on that and related subjects from many
publishers. Check any bookstore with a large computer book or
legal book section.
At one time, there was a "model" Shareware license agreement
posted on CompuServe. I used it as a starting point for the
license agreement used in GAGS (appendix C in the GAGS manual),
but it was much different from what I ended up with.
It may or may not help to talk to a lawyer, since the whole
issue of legal protection for Shareware is still so uncertain.
If you're writing a program that you think is worth a lot, you
should probably talk to a lawyer. Keep in mind that lawyers are
expensive.
Publications
------------
Unfortunately, now that InfoWorld has completed the transition
from general-interest computer newspaper to a newsweekly for
"volume buyers of PCs," there aren't really any regular news
sources for these types of issues. Of course, InfoWorld and
many other magazines will continue to publish occasional
articles on these issues.
Another good source for this type of information are local user
group newsletters. Groups like the Boston Computer Society, and
the San Francisco PC Users Group provide excellent newsletters.
If anyone knows of other publications that cover these issues
regularly, please let me know.
Me
Fidonews Page 15 5 Jan 1987
--
I'll continue writing occasional articles about the progress of
some of these issues, and will drop them into FidoNews and
anywhere else I'm welcome. I'm always glad to talk about the
issue, too.
Mark J. Welch, Shareware author
(The Generic Adventure Game System)
P.O. Box 2409, San Francisco, CA 94126
Voice (415) 845-2430 [Berkeley]
Fido 161/459 [private, Seadog]
BIX 'mwelch'
[About the author: Mark J. Welch is now a freelance writer and
full-time law student. He was formerly a reporter for InfoWorld
and earlier was associate news editor for BYTE.]
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Fidonews Page 16 5 Jan 1987
=================================================================
NOTICES
=================================================================
The Interrupt Stack
17 Jan 1987
Deadline for voting on the proposed bylaws. Your ballot MUST
be received by this date!
17 May 1987
Metro-Fire Fido's Second Birthday BlowOut and Floppy Disk
Throwing Tournament! All Fido Sysops and Families Invited!
Contact Christopher Baker at 135/14 for more information.
24 Aug 1989
Voyager 2 passes Neptune.
If you have something which you would like to see on this
calendar, please send a message to FidoNet node 1/1.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
RADIO COMPUTING DIGEST
Devoted to Low-Cost, License-Free, Wireless Computer
Communications. Public Digital Radio Service (PDRS) coverage, and
much more. PDRS baud rate, in excess of One Million bps.
Radio Computing Digest (RCD) will show you how to set up Digital
Radio Stations, BBS's and LAN's. Both local and long distance
links possible. Connect your computer to others, without Ma Bell!
For a copy of RCD's Premier Issue, send Three Dollars to:
P. L. Christensen, Box 916, Oroville, WA. 98844
-----------------------------------------------------------------
WEIRDBASE IS BACK ON-LINE!
Yes, Fido 100/523, WeirdBase, the coordinator of the Magick and
SF Echomail conferences, is back up and on-line. I apologize to
the entire world for the crash; it was mostly my fault (but be
VERY careful using RENUM on a hard disk that is nearly full). If
you sent me, or anyone at 100/523, FidoNet mail during the week
prior to December 13th, it was probably lost un-read. Please re-
send it. Thank you!
- Brad Hicks, Founding Sysop
WeirdBase, Fido 100/523
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Fidonews Page 17 5 Jan 1987
*Official IFNA By-laws Ballot
Official IFNA Articles of Association and By-laws Ballot
We, the interim directors of IFNA, submit for ratification the
Articles of Association and By-laws as published in FidoNews
number 349. In accordance with the recommendation of the By-laws
Committee, each person listed as the Sysop of one or more FidoNet
nodes, as of NODELIST.311 dated November 7, 1986, is entitled to
ONE vote.
The proposed IFNA Articles of Association and By-laws, as
published in Fido349.NWS dated December 22, 1986, should be:
(Check one line) Adopted ________
Rejected ________
I am the SYSOP of record a FidoNet node which was listed in
NODELIST.311 dated November 7, 1986 and have the right to cast
one vote. There will be ONLY be one vote per person. There will
be ONLY one vote per net/node number. I understand these rules
and cast my ballot in accordance with them.
_______________________ ___________
Signature Date
_____/______
Net Node
Return this ballot via U. S. Mail to arrive not later than
January 17, 1987 at:
IFNA Ratification
C/O Christopher L. Bonfanti, CPA
Aselage, Kiefer & Co.
701 Emerson Road, Suite 201
Creve Coeur Corporate Center
St Louis, Mo. 63141-6709
Aselage, Kiefer & Co. are Certified Public Accountants and will
provide an independent count of the vote and publish the results
in FidoNews. Votes received by Saturday, January 17th will be
included in the results.
-----------------------------------------------------------------