Re: Software 'licensing' <RANT>

[cheer@i.hate.spam (Christopher D. Heer)]

It was Tue, 04 Mar 1997 12:16:06 +0000.  I was reading instead of working.  And 
rubywand@swbell.net <rubywand@swbell.net> said:

>Christopher D. Heer writes ...

>> It was 3 Mar 1997 09:47:55 -0500.  I was reading instead of > working.  And
>> Dark_Dude <Dark_Dude@darkcastle.ecore.fnet.org> said:

>> >In Article <5f714r$joc@News.Dal.Ca>,
>> ><at217@chebucto.ns.ca> wrote:

>> >>> situation... How many people can really afford 2 copies of each program?

>> >>Just as you cannot legally steal a second computer because you can't
>> >>afford to buy it, if you cannot afford to buy two copies, you'll have to
>> >>make due with one. The rules are the same despite the easier duplication
>> >>of software.

>> >I understand, but still I find this a rediculous law. Escpecially the giant
>> >software companies would earn more & more. (Does Bill REALLY need more 
>> >money?

>> Stealing is always easier if you rationalise that you're taking 
>> from some big faceless company with lots of dough ....

>     It is perfectly legal for the owner of a software product to 
>make backup copies. If the product is copy-protected, it is 
>perfectly legal to defeat the protection in order to make a backup.

>     In fact, software makers do, generally, encourage purchasers to 
>make backups. Some even include special copiers for backing up 
>copy-protected wares. Copy-protected products are, in most cases, 
>more likely to fail. Having to replace these, essentially, defective 
>products is an expense software makers prefer to avoid.  

>     There is nothing ambiguous about the right to make 
>backups. Unless he or she is unable to make a copy, there is no need 
>for a purchaser to buy second or third copies _for_ _backup_.

>     A backup is just that, a copy to use in case the original 
>fails. It is a copyright violation to distribute copies of a 
>copyrighted product, say, in an office setting, unless permission 
>for distribution is obtained from the copyright holder. 

I don't disagree with any of that.

The example in question was a family that owns two computers and installs a 
package on both because they couldn't afford two copies.

Totally different situation.
-- 
          Christopher D. Heer - cheer at us dot oracle dot com
     My opinions are my own and do not reflect those of Oracle Corp.
    SPAMProtect: You'll need to fix my email address before replying.