15 Apr
2003
15 Apr
'03
12:11 p.m.
From: "Paul Berger"
<sanepsycho(a)globaldialog.com>
On Mon, 2003-03-10 at 16:46, Lawrence Walker wrote:
Hi
The only problem here is something I saw done ( and
admitted to ) in shareware. The product was release to
shareware with a known bug. In order to get it fixed,
simply pay for the support/upgrade. I chose to delete
the original and not use either.
I had a couple of shareware programs that I released.
They were used by many hundreds of people. I only had
4 people send me the $5. I'm not complaining. Actually
I'm happy that so many found them useful. I'll have to
admit that most were college students so they have a good
excuse.
I've also used several shareware programs without sending
any money in so I can't complain about others. There were
a couple that I did send money in for and used quite a bit.
My only complaint is with abandonware. When the code is
no longer relevant, why hang onto it as though it were
of some value. I can see that one could make a point that
there might be something in the source that was of value
but the application is different.
Dwight
Why does this legalistic crap with high moral
tone
forever come up on the list. For the most part almost
all old computer collectors are using programs illegally.
<snip>
a thousand others sitting on a program which they
won't
put into public domain due to not giving a shit about the
end user.
I usually take the extremely legalistic point of view to highlight to
people that the current system of copyright is broken, and only getting
more so to protect the interests of a few.
Whenever I catch somebody I know doing something that is technically
illegal I point out this fact most strenuous and let them know they can
get a criminal records, do jail time and receive millions in fines if
somebody takes offense at what they are doing. I will then suggest that
if they think this is wrong they should contact their representative and
suggest things be changed.
Most shrug, figure I'm a kook (probably right) and don't do a damn thing
... this is why things won't change.
Why is there not an similar outcry about
companies like
Lotus or Borland that put out products that were obsoleted
<snip>
companies it's tit for tat. Apple and a few
others do the
decent thing but they are the exceptions not the rule.
Borland has released some of their old dos compilers on their community
site, so I would not knock them too much. They sold off the rights to
many of their applications so I would not expect them to release them to
the public.
I'm hoping that the shareware type idea will come back with the rise of
open-source software creating new niches, and the big software companies
charging for support & updates. You don't want support, the software is
free, but if you want somebody to answer questions, you need to pay the
author something.
Regards,
Paul