dmg@retina.mitre.org (David Gursky) (09/26/89)
In Virus-L Digest V2 #203, an anonymous author (IA9600 --
<IA96%PACE.BITNET@VMA.CC.CMU.EDU>) writes:
this is not so. shareware is for the most part copyrighted and
mr. mcafee's software does indeed carry a copyright! as the owner
of a work which is copyrighted, j. mcafee caN CALL IT SHAREWARE
OR ANY OTHER NAME HE DESIRES, EVEN FREEWARE, AND STILL MAINTAIN
THE ABSOLUTE RIGHT TO DETERMINE WHO MAY OR MAY NOT DISTRIBUTE
HIS COPYRIGHTED WORK!
A copyrighted work is the sole property of the holder of the
copyright.like it or not, that is the law of the land. until
such time a case comes to court, copyrighted shareware remains
the property of the copyright holder, who may decide who has the
right to distribute such work.
- -----
I do not contest that the author of a computer application (especially
a copyrighted application) is entitled to set whatever conditions they
want on the use or distribution of their work, and I have stated so
before. But this is a different issue than whether such an
application qualifies as "Shareware", "Freeware", etc.
Shareware has a specific meaning: software (copyrighted or otherwise)
that is distributed outside of commercial channels, that is paid for
if the user decides to use it. Freeware is a subset of this; the cost
of a freeware application is zero. Nowhere in this definition is
there a prohibition of the distribution of copyrighted software!
Any author is welcome to put whatever restrictions they want on their
work, no question about it. When those restrictions go beyond a
certain point, they author cannot fairly call their work Shareware,
IMO.
This is getting/has gotten outside of the scope of Virus-L. If
individuals wish to send me e-mail about it, fine. Otherwise I
consider the subject closed.