Re: Software 'licensing' <RANT>

[toh@freenet.Victoria.BC.CA (Marc Sira)]

In our last episode, dalloff@freenet.columbus.oh.us (Dave Althoff) said:

>Now, given that...
>a)  Your office is locked up and vacant when you are not in it, and
>b)  No one is home if you are not there
>
>It seems obvious to me that you can only use your Gigantic Word Processor
>on one computer at a time.  So why is it not permissible for you to
>install that word processor on both machines?  Just because the program
>now installs on a hard drive, making it possible for two people to use it
>at once, it is no longer OK to use the same program in both places.  You
>must now spend many $$$ in order to be legal about it.

Read the licence carefully, and in most cases you'll note that what you're
actually licenced to do is *run* one copy of the software at a time. So yes,
it is perfectly permissible to have multiple copies on multiple machines,
such as the scenario you describe. Someone at work does this with some crappy
piece of Wintel software he bought, and he takes licencing to fanatical
lengths - he compresses and encrypts the application in question (his own
licenced copy) when he goes home from work, so that no one could possibly
be running it at the same time he's using it at home.

Of course, not all licences are the same. It's just an agreement you
enter into with the copyright holder, and can say pretty much anything
(and you would do well to read it before entering into it). Many
licences go way overboard and stipulate conditions that would never
hold up in court (Micro$oft particularly likes these), but the authors
(or their lawyers) choose to write them that way, and you agree to them
(possibly by default) by paying the authors (and their lawyers) for and
running the software.

You'll see a lot of Mac software that prowls out across an Appletalk network
with broadcast packets, looking for identical serial numbers and refusing
to run if it finds them (I find this rather annoying actually). Obviously
the software doesn't know or care if there are other copies on disk somewhere -
what's licenced is a *running* copy (or more than one in many cases).

Worrying about this kind of thing is usually just a bit silly, regardless
of whether it's done automatically (such as that described in the paragraph
above) or manually (as in the topic of this whole conversation). Most people
know darn well whether they've paid for the number of actual licences they
use on a regular basis, and they're either ok with that or they're not.
I've downloaded lots of software I didn't licence, tried it out, and tossed
it. Who would have the disk space to keep everything, or the time to use it
all? If I use something personally on a regular basis and the spirit of the
author's intention is that it be licenced, I'll do so. If I use something in
the course of my job at work, I'll inform my employer that we need another
licence. And if I profit from the use of some piece of software at work or
at home, I'll certainly pay for it. I know, and everyone knows, when I'm
breaking the spirit of a licencing agreement, and all the flame wars in the
world won't change this.

This segues into a discussion of why software piracy is *not* theft - you may
consider it morally wrong, financially harmful, or just downright evil, but
theft deprives another of something they *own*. You don't own the software you
bought - you licence it. Copying it and running it unlicenced, while
debatably good or bad for lots of reasons, does not deprive the original
owner of the licence they paid for . Stealing a computer, for instance (as has
been done to me on a couple of occasions) is a whole other act - that of
theft. Piracy is not theft, if the word "theft" is to retain useful meaning -
it's piracy, whatever that is, and has to be discussed in a different sphere.
Analogies with stolen goods do nothing to clarify the issue (analogies
seldom do unless they're very, very carefully and judiciously applied, and
Usenet is rarely a careful forum).

Hope that addresses your question a bit, despite the major tangent. ;)

-- 
Marc Sira			   |
{ub675,toh}@freenet.victoria.bc.ca | "Your god drinks...p-p-peach nectar!"
{aa,xx}382@freenet.carleton.ca	   '