gnu@hoptoad.uucp (John Gilmore) (12/19/87)
[Discussion redirected to comp.sources.d, please followup there. Alt.sources
is for source code. -- gnu]
My position is that if the actual terms under which the software is
distributed are OK, the author is free to ask people to voluntarily do
anything, including send them money.
The terms of the Chat software look a lot like the usual Berkeley, GNU,
utzoo, or other terms: keep our copyright, include the whole piece of
work, let people know it can be gotten for free if you charge for it, etc.
In fact the legal terms are less restrictive than the GNU software;
GNU won't let you redistribute in binary without source, and the only mod
you can make to the terms is to add a warrantee.
Carl Gutekunst's entry in the "comp.sources.unix archives" listing says
that to get tapes of archived software from him, you should "call WELL in
advance and bring lunch money". Is that an outrageous thing to ask?
How does that compare with asking people who use the software to
voluntarily send in $29? I think both are fine as long as people who
disagree are able to legally get and use the software for no money.
If you like this article and you want to reward me, just email your
contribution, in US$, to gnu@toad.com :-).
--
{pyramid,ptsfa,amdahl,sun,ihnp4}!hoptoad!gnu gnu@toad.com
"Watch me change my world..." -- Liquid Theatre