🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <2gf77o$l...@explorer.clark.net> th...@clark.net (Taylor Hutt) writes:
>In article <gunzlerC...@netcom.com>,
>Mitch Gunzler <gun...@netcom.com> wrote:
>
>I believe that the owner of the copyright, under ths shareware principal, 
>allows you to copy the disk freely, as long as you don't modify it in 

Well, rather than look at the "shareware principal," which does not refer
to either a legal definition or what a particular author may choose to call
"shareware," you should pay attention to what copyright holders have the power
to do, and what Id in fact chose to do with that.

	1) Copyright entitles you to prevent people from copying your
	property without your permission (there are some exceptions, though);

	2) ID included a notice telling you that you are free to load
	their program into RAM, run it, and oh yes

		"... you may make copies of the Software to give to
		other persons.  You may not charge or receive any 
		consideration from any other person for receipt or use
		of the Software without ID's  prior written consent
		as specified in the VENDOR.DOC file."

So, ID went to the trouble of asking you you *not* to charge for the receipt
of their file without arranging with them for a vendor's license.

>anyway.  Id would be on shaky ground if they tried to get money from 
>these people, because these distributors are doing exactly what Id says 
>you can do.  The little point of contention is the charge for the disk.  

Yep.  ID said you con't distribute if you charge.
If you're just distributing the disks, well, then just distribute the disk.

>The distributor can easily circumvent this with a big warning that they 
>are not selling the game, merely copying it.  It becomes the 

Sorry, that's precisely the point, "merely copying it" is a controlled activity.


>>>that does NOT entitle the game's author to a percentage. 
>>
>>No, it entitles them to *stop* you from doing so. [distributing for a fee]
>
>Not if they tell the rest of the people that they can copy it.  What is 
>good for one person must be good for all.  You cannot be selective here.

Why not?



    Sorry if I'm beating a comatose horse,
    Mitch