dj@ctron.com (DJ Delorie) (04/20/91)
> Austin Code Works does seem pretty rude. Perhaps a concerned/vindictive > individual/organisation with some free time could maintain a listing of how > to obtain each of their products for free via FTP or mailserver. A listing > in exact correspondence with their latest ads in magazines, prominently > posted, would surely reduce their profits a bit. Posting FTP sites to help netters find and use free & good quality software is a Good Thing. Posting FTP sites to try to put a company out of business is a Bad Thing. In my opinion, Your verbiage tarnishes the respectable image and good intentions of organizations like FSF, universities, ShareWare, and PD programmers which exist to enrich our lives, and not to bring grief to others. I spent a year working on porting GCC to a 386 running DOS. It was a lot of work, and "cost" me a lot of time and energy that I could have spent doing other things. I did it purely for fun, and so that I would have a 32-bit compiler to use for development. I made this package available FREE OF CHARGE to any who wished to have it, as long as I didn't have to spend my own money to do so. ACW asked permission to distribute my package in conjunction with FSF sources (in accordance with the GPL), printed documentation (bought from FSF), and BSD library sources (in accordance with their copyrights). I get a portion of the money received for my effort and for the support I provide to the customers (which netters get FREE OF CHARGE). The remainder, in my opinion, is not much more than what I would expect a company would spend for advertising, shipping, overhead, and the numerous other expenses incurred in any business. If you are the holder of a copyright on a work of software, and you feel that the copyright has been violated by anyone, then TAKE THE OTHER PARTY TO COURT. This is the only appropriate course of action; griping doesn't help. Most copyright statements I've seen in software distributed via the net have loopholes big enough for any company to drive an armored car through, and will be hard to enforce against a good lawyer. The copyright system is designed to protect authors, and the court system is very good at applying that protection. A good copyright, however, is up to the programmer. Politeness is not guaranteed by the constitution. If you don't like the way a company does business, don't do business with them. If enough people do this, that company will go out of business from its own faults. The energy you expend trying to convince others to boycott a business could be used to provide a better service or product, or support their competitor. That's the American Way. PS: Here's my contribution to the "free-of-charge" software list: grape.ecs.clarkson.edu ~ftp/pub/msdos/djgcc/* 386/DOS GCC/G++ compiler May it enhance the lives of my fellow programmers, and bring them joy and ease of programming until it becomes obsolete. I will be glad to make other arrangements, as long as I don't have to spend my own money. DJ Delorie dj@ctron.com ----- Standard Disclaimer: I speak only for myself, and my karma is not troubled by my words.
rhys@cs.uq.oz.au (Rhys Weatherley) (04/21/91)
In <1436@balrog.ctron.com> dj@ctron.com (DJ Delorie) writes: > Most copyright statements I've seen in software >distributed via the net have loopholes big enough for any company to >drive an armored car through, and will be hard to enforce against a >good lawyer. The copyright system is designed to protect authors, and >the court system is very good at applying that protection. A good >copyright, however, is up to the programmer. I agree entirely. From my own experience I've found it VERY hard to find the best "set of words" to put on my software (and I'm still looking). I'm not a computer lawyer, and I don't know any computer lawyers (or have the money to pay one to write a copyright message). So I've usually been reduced to modifying the copyright message on someone else's program to fit my circumstances. 99% of the time I use the GNU General Public License, because my user population generally knows what they are getting with GNU-protected software. Also, the GNU License comes with full instructions of what words need to be placed where and exactly what you have to distribute. But I don't really want to use this license (no reflection on the GNU people - they are doing a good job which I support). I'd rather use a license that says: (a) You can distribute the binaries far and wide for no charge whatsoever. (b) My name and copyright messages must always be attached. (c) I don't really want any money (my job pays enough), but I'll take any given to me. (d) You CANNOT have the sources no matter how much you beg and grovel. (e) If you make money out of distributing my program, then I have some friends in the Mafia who would like to have a nice little chat with you :-) . What I'd like to see is an FTP site somewhere (or a mail server would be better) that is the central collection point for ALL types of copyright messages, covering every possible combination of conditions on distributing source and binary forms, getting royalties, etc. Then programmer X can say "I want a message that does this: ..." and the site will give it to him/her together with his/her name attached in the required spots. Also, full instructions can be included with it as well. (a mail server is better for this because it's more tolerant of "questions"). Programmers generally don't know the "legalese", but do want to protect themselves. And as DJ points out, most messages won't stand up to a good lawyer. Rhys. P.S. If you want to join the "Society for ENGLISH Copyrights", check this box: ----- | | ----- :-) +=====================+==================================+ || Rhys Weatherley | The University of Queensland, || || rhys@cs.uq.oz.au | Australia. G'day!! || +=====================+==================================+