NODE 6d5606b1Re: Netscape
nobody@REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)Thu, 25 Jul 1996 01:51:35 +0800
Jeff Weinstein wrote:
> I'm also curious why these anonymous crusaders did not act
> sooner? The US version has been available for sale in retail
> outlets for about a year now. Was it not worth $50 to make
> your point?
If you look real carefully at ftp://utopia.hacktic.nl/pub/replay
/pub/incoming you'll notice that the "commercial" 2.01 for Win32
has actually been uploaded.
The reason that is was not done sooner is probably that it felt
more like stealing to upload software that Netscape expected you
to pay for. Now that Netscape is finally giving away strong crypto
versions to anybody who asks for it (and claims to be an American)
it isn't really stealing in the same sense anymore. It's just ITAR
we're ignoring, not Netscape's commercial interests.
NODE 7481038eRe: Netscape
David Sternlight <david@sternlight.com>Thu, 25 Jul 1996 11:10:12 +0800
At 7:31 AM -0700 7/24/96, Anonymous wrote:
>Jeff Weinstein wrote:
>> I'm also curious why these anonymous crusaders did not act
>> sooner? The US version has been available for sale in retail
>> outlets for about a year now. Was it not worth $50 to make
>> your point?
>
>If you look real carefully at ftp://utopia.hacktic.nl/pub/replay
>/pub/incoming you'll notice that the "commercial" 2.01 for Win32
>has actually been uploaded.
>
>The reason that is was not done sooner is probably that it felt
>more like stealing to upload software that Netscape expected you
>to pay for. Now that Netscape is finally giving away strong crypto
>versions to anybody who asks for it (and claims to be an American)
>it isn't really stealing in the same sense anymore. It's just ITAR
>we're ignoring, not Netscape's commercial interests.
The above statement is false. You have to agree to the license for the
beta, and the release will likely have the same terms as before--you have
to buy it unless
you're a US student or some such. Netscape is NOT "giving it away". Even
the no-charge users are licensed under carefully crafted terms. And as the
copyright owner, they, not you decide on redistribution policy even for
cases where it is a no-charge copy.
So it IS stealing to redistribute without permission--it is THEIR
intellectual property and only they may decide on what terms others may
have a copy.
And yes, I'm a licensed user and paid for mine.
David