software ethics

[lauren at rand-unix.ARPA]

I tried once before to get a "software ethics" list started, but to
no avail.  The attitude that some people publicly state that implies
it is "all right to try wangle around agreements" shows, if nothing else,
a very low ethical standard.  I can't help but be saddened when 
I'm attacked for being "too ethical" since I follow the rules and
refuse to rip people off.

I suppose it is silly to expect any higher ethical standards in the
computer community than in the rest of society at large.  If there
were a software ethics list I'd invite replies there, but since
there isn't, please send flames to /dev/null.

--Lauren--

P.S.  I too have talked to senior AT&T officials over the years.
      And they have assured me that they feel quite confident of
      their trade-secret stance on Unix and will protect it.
      But in any case, I am disgusted to see the people standing around
      like vultures trying to find some way to rip off AT&T.
      I hope there's a special hell for people like that--one where
      they are condemned to an eternity of running a version 1.0 RSX.
      I guess this hell would be next door to the hell for people
      who think that making and distributing "free" copies of
      licensed microcomputer code is also just fine and dandy.
      They are clearly related groups.

      Unless intellectual property rights can be reasonably protected,
      we are headed down a very rough path indeed.  Copy protection
      systems are a hassle for the legit users, and this really only
      leaves legal remedies in the absence of any personal ethical
      sense on the part of many people in the community.

      Once again, I'd like to propose a separate list to discuss such
      software ethics topics rather than clog up these technical lists.

--LW--