X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.cdromlan
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1992 16:50:00 LCL
              <CDROMLAN@IDBSU.BITNET>
From:         "Barker, Scott" <BARKER.ILS@MHS.UNC.EDU>
Subject:      OED2 CD-ROM/Network Restriction

To Ruth Glynn
CD-ROM Project Manager, OUP

I read with interest the terms you spelled out on networking your OED
product.  While I am sympathetic to your needs, I find your reaction to
be typical of some of the narrow minded vendors that I thought
disappeared into obscurity a few years ago.

It wasn't that long ago that software in general was difficult to
network.  Not for technical reasons, but because narrow minded vendors
were concerned that they might lose a potential sale.  You saw vendors
making it practically impossible to install and de-install their
products, often requiring special serial numbers, only a limited number
of installs, and copy protection schemes.  On the software side all of
those techniques failed MISERABLY.  People simply refused to purchase
products with those kind of restrictions.

I see similar efforts in your CD-ROM networking restrictions.  With the
popularity of CD-ROM networks, there are many times when you might want
to purchase a single copy of a product and install it on the CD-ROM
server - simply because there are no individual workstations with CD-ROM
drives in your organization.  After all, with a network why buy them?

However with your restrictions, you can't even place the OED CD on that
shared equipment EVEN WITH JUST ONE USER without violating the license
agreement.

You are automatically jumping to the conclusion that a shared piece of
equipment means shared multi-user access.  THAT IS NOT NECESSARILY THE
CASE.
You could very easilly still just be having one user use the product, but
since they don't have local equipment - you have them run it over the
net.

Are you suggesting that customers pay extra for that privledge?  How
ridiculous if so.  After all - it is our equipment (and expensive
equipment at that) which is making everying work properly.  You the
vendor are providing no value added and we the user are doing nothing
different than a single user on a local drive OTHER THAN MOVING THE
PHYSICAL LOCATION OF THE DISK.  The CD-drive essentially is down the hall
attached via a long wire, rather than right next to your machine.   You
wouldn't object if someone bought a long extension cord and plugged their
CD-drive into an outlet 10 feet away.  But you do object when the word
"network" pops in there and that extension cord becomes a network wire.

I find this assumption that people who network are automatically going to
have more users than licensed for absurd.  You essentiallly are telling
network users that you don't trust them - that you have to protect
yourself from them doing something evil.

Ridiculous......

You should look at the practice of the VAST majority of software vendors
these days.  They offer attractive network pricing so people can have
multiple users at a reasonable cost.  They don't do stupid things like
saying - oh you want it on a network, that will cost twice as much to
start and require a "special" version.  And oh - you want 3 simultaneous
users - that will be three times the regular purchase price.  It's those
kinds of crazy pricing structures that encourage people to do the evil
you're assuming they're going to do at the beginning.

With reasonable pricing everyone wants to do things by the book and would
be more than happy to pay for the additional value that networking
licenses provide.  I can't tell you how many 10 packs of X package I buy,
or 30 copies of Y package I get to stay within license agreements - not
to mention the use of network metering software to insure that we stay
within those limits.

The successful companies realize that the VAST majority of network
managers will do whatever is within reason to stay within license
agreements.  The successful companies help those network managers by
offering attractive multi-user SIMULTANEOUS USE pricing structures.  The
successful companies also realize that the practice of placing a piece of
software on the network does not by itself mean that you are providing
shared multi-user access.  You may be, and if you are you need to pay the
additional cost for the use.  But when you still have just one user -
network pricing and local use pricing and network and local user versions
are the same.

Those are the kinds of products I want to buy - and it sounds like OED
isn't one of them.  I'm sure your attitude is one that many other
potential customers wouldn't like either.  I hope you'll re-evaluate
your position.

Scott Barker
Director of Computing
School of Information and Library Science
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
eMail: barker@ils.unc.edu, Phone: (919) 962-8366
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU