From: rock@lakes.trenton.sc.us (rock)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.datacomm
Subject: Re: C-NET                
Date: Thu, 03 Sep 92 19:17:16 EDT
X-Maildoor: WaflineMail 1.00r

LJ>From: Les_Jenkins@lppl.mi.org (Les Jenkins)
LJ>
LJ> PK>   What do you think us PD programmers release source code FOR, if n
LJ> PK> for other people to make use of it?
LJ>
LJ>Thats fine and dandy as long as YOU don't mind having something YOU work
LJ>hard on and gave out FREELY to be SOLD by someone else and not receive e
LJ>a stupid THANK YOU in the docs.
LJ>
LJ>Most authors of PD example code released it expecting it to be used perh
LJ>in personal or otherwise PD programs. Or to be used as a guide on how to
LJ>a certain thing. Most require that the person who wishes to use it as pa
LJ>of a commercial package contact the author of the code for permission an
LJ>even THEN they ask for credit where it is due. Ken has done neither of
LJ>those things and, quite personally, if I had the talent to write a bit o
LJ>code others would like to use and released it to the PD only to have Ken
LJ>cut and paste it into his commercial software, I'd be quite P.O.ed about
LJ>it.

No, I don't think that is the case at all.  The problem here is that YOU
don't grasp the difference between PD and freely distributable.  If,
through your own ignorance, you surrender all rights to a program, and then
someone else profits from it, whose fault is that?  YOURS.  If you release
your work to the public domain, you have SURRENDERED YOUR RIGHTS TO IT.  If
you release it as freely distributable, you RETAIN YOUR RIGHTS, but charge
no fee.  In fact, almost everything I've seen that is freely distributable
has a clause in it that says essentially just what you feel:  it's okay to
use this program if you are using it for yourself or for educational
purposes, but if you are a business or you make money off it, you must pay
a fee.  (Or get permission from the author, which usually ENTAILS paying a
fee.)  The moral?  If you want to control your work, yet you want to allow
people to benifit from it, do not relase it to the public domain!  Release
it as freely distributable and attatch a liscense file to it.

Now, before every pinhead out there takes offense and starts pounding me,
this is NOT a flame.  This is a real problem, the fact that it seems so
many people truly cannot distinguish between PD and freely distributable.
(Evidenced by the fact that people are releasing stuff as PD and attatching
notices of copyright to it!  Mutually exclusive, folks!  Can't have both at
once!) Someone is going to make the mistake of releasing something really
wonderful into the PD, and he is going to lose his right to profit from it
out of ignorance of copyright law.  So instead of arguing the point about
immorality, etc., all you folks who are doing so, just ACCEPT IT.  Whether
it is right or not, THAT IS THE WAY COPYRIGHT LAW WORKS, and if you refuse
to open your eyes to it, you are going to get burned!

"Sometimes what you say is going to get right in the faces of the powerful
 people who really run this world, but you don't care....  You know it's
 your place to challenge authority...."

Rockerboy, digital artiste' (rock@lakes.trenton.sc.us)
---
 * Amiga-Reader V2.00 * You, too, will be assimilated.