Asimov & *LACK* of respecting programmers choices

[nathan@visi.com (Nathan Mates)]

In article <01bba6ef$67ace800$0ddbface@myhostname.aros.net>,
Kevin <kkralian@aros.net> wrote:
>> doesn't give a damn. I have the right to do what I want with my
>> programs. Some I release as Freeware, others get sold. That's a nice
>> little *choice* I and/or whomever funded the software get to

>Read what you just wrote. You're completely right- It's a choice that the
>author/company gets to make.

   Bingo. Give the man a cookie. Problem is, most of the stuff on
Asimov was commercial. In other words, the author/company copyrighted
it, and chose to sell it. In the absence of any new information on
choices, we assume that their choice remains the same, none of this
"we feel that all programmers would want their stuff copied" garbage.
Do not assume anything about anyone just by the way you feel; if you
want to know how someone feels about something, then ask them. Is that
so hard to grasp?

   If the author chooses to write something, sell five copies, and
then retire to a monastary in outer Mongolia, that's his choice. It's
not your decision to say "nobody can get this amazing piece of
software, and we think he'd be pleased to let everyone see it, so
let's copy it at will." Only the author can come back later and say
"go ahead and copy that." If the author moves on, fine. If the author
decides to pop back in and say "sure, that's now public domain,"
great; put the software on all the *legitimate* Apple II sites so that
anyone can get at it. [And for the publically available stuff, such as
the Eamons, many people have stated that *legitimate* Apple II sites
do a way better job at being up to date. But, that's a total side
issue.]

   Am I "controlling" asimov? No, I'm trying to respect the last
stated wishes of the author/company involved. If you truly feel that
they'd be receptive to people copying them, then ask them *FIRST*. Not
later. If these "archivers" had ANY respect for anyone else, they'd do
that. From what evidence I've seen, they're not doing that. Therefore,
(1) They have zero respect for the programmer's wishes, and (2) Are
pirating. Thus, Asimov is guilty on moral and legal grounds.

Nathan Mates
--
<*> Nathan Mates http://www.visi.com/~nathan/      <*>
# What are the facts? Again and again and again-- what are the _facts_?
# Shun wishful thinking, avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors
# think-- what are the facts, and to how many decimal places?  -R.A. Heinlein