Charging the net....

[Brad Templeton]

Copyright controls who can copy a file.  By posting your message to
USENET, you caused it to be copied to the file /u/news/news/admin/12345
(or whatever) on my machine.    I can't charge you for that, because when
I set up a USENET link I did it aware that people would send files to my
machine in this manner without expectation of paying.

However, the copyright on your article is still yours.  You can put
further restrictions on it.   You have, implicitly, given me permission to
read it -- ie. copy it into my newsreader for formatting, etc.

I also have, under copyright law, the right to make archival copies.
I own the copy in the news spool directory which you sent to me.  But that's
it.

If I wish to copy it to a disk file, perhaps processing it with uudecode or
tar or ZIP or unshar or whatever, I need your permission.   This is implicit
in most postings of software or binaries to this net.

However, not in the case of the shareware.  Shareware places explicit
limitations on the way you can copy the file.  In particular, it says you
can copy it only to perform an evaluation, and that use after the evaluation
requires a fee.

This is my understanding of the law.  Copyright law gives the copyright holder
complete control over copying of the work, except for archival copies and
a number of specific exemptions.   The shareware licence is indeed valid.

(Some people, oddly enough, have argued that shareware showing up on your
machine is unsolicited merchandise -- yours to keep.  The file that showed
up is indeed yours to keep, but you are not allowed to make further copies or
derivative works.  If you get an unsolicited book in the mail, it's yours to
keep, but you are not allowed to make copies or derivative works)

However, this is moot.  There are enough enemies of the shareware concept on
the net who will ignore the law and say, "You sent it to me, I don't have to
pay."   It doesn't matter if they are right or wrong, they will do this, and
you can't stop them in any convenient way.  As such, they have made shareware
a non-feasable distribution method on USENET.     Too bad, because the
grass-roots nature of shareware fits well with the grass-roots nature of
usenet, except with those who think it is a sin for programmers to charge for
their work.
-- 
Brad Templeton, ClariNet Communications Corp. -- Waterloo, Ontario 519/884-7473