Re: Liscensing and Copyrights

From: Daniel Koepke (dkoepke@CALIFORNIA.COM)
Date: 09/25/97

On Thu, 25 Sep 1997, Sammy wrote:

-+>     On a more personal opinion note. Circle is suppose to be free ware, as intended
-+> by its author.
-+Huh?  I've never seen that said.  Freeware is normally synonymous with
-+"public domain", which is impossible without breaking the original diku

Disagreement, here.  Freeware is *not* normally synonymous with
public domain.  Freeware is defined as being free, but still being
copyrighted.  At least, that is the definition I have seen on every
single freeware product I ever looked at.  In fact, I've often

  This software is "freeware", not "shareware" or "public domain".

-+> As normal social etiquette would dictate the purpose for this is
-+> that if you are capable of creating some new code that enhances the software that
-+> was GIVEN to you, you would be expected to repay that kindness with an offering of
-+> your own. This is what I consider the spirit of the statements set forth by the
-+> creators of Circle MUD. Although Bill Gates didn't accumulate 36 billion dollars by
-+> sticking to the spirit of his agreements, just the letter.
-+We certainly won't refuse any code or areas you care to share.

I've always wondered just how many people actually use the code and
area additions to Circle.  I remember once upon a time Alex posted
a listing of the most frequent downloads from the contrib/code
directory...It'd be interesting to see how it's changed over time;
although it's not indicative of how many people are using each
contributed item.  From my recollection, the sad fact was that all
or most of my patches had been downloaded more than the FAQ...:(

Daniel Koepke -:- -:-  [Shadowlord/Nether]

     | Ensure that you have read the CircleMUD Mailing List FAQ:  |
     | |

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/08/00 PST