Re: Building An Apple ][ Software Archive

["Arkain" <rwking@no.usa.spam.net>]

Frank's only mistake was concluding that "freeware" is always necessarily
copyrighted. The conflicting examples that you and he pulled is proof that
this is not the case. While freeware is almost always copyrighted, the
matter of copyright has little to do with the freeware term.

Arkain

Paul Schlyter <pausch@saafNOSPAM.se> wrote in message
news:8r1p9v$g5o$1@merope.saaf.se...
> In article <st8cv8p5jdkv98@corp.supernews.com>,
> Arkain <rwking@usa.nospam.net> wrote:
>
> > "Roy and/or Janet Miller" <millers@inetnebr.com> wrote in message
> > 39D425B5.ECA67205@inetnebr.com">news:39D425B5.ECA67205@inetnebr.com...
> >> Jumping back in...
> >>
> >> Arkain wrote:
> >>
> >>> You and Paul seem to be having so much fun doing research on these
terms
> >>> that I dare not deprive you of your fun. The truth is actually 1/2 way
> >>> between the 2 of you.
> >>
> >> Ah, but Paul and Frank are at least quoting "authorities", your
> > definitions seem
> >> to have no greater authority than that of your own opinion, and, as we
> > here all
> >> know, there are plenty of others with differing opinions.
> >
> > Seeing as how they don't agree on which "authority" to use... I simply
> > decided to insert a definition that fits all known occurances(personal
> > observation) of either term. Whether or not they fit is a job I leave to
> > them.
>
> Sorry, but our two definitions are mutually exclusive:
>
> 1. Public domain software is not freeware
>
> 2. Public domain software is one type of freeware
>
> As you can see, one cannot contruct one definition which embraces both
these
> cases -- at least not if that definition is to be unambiguous....
<snipped>