Re: Walnut Creek CD-ROM Morality

Mike Meyer (mwm@contessa.phone.net)
Sun, 18 Dec 94 20:03:26 PST

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: James D. Murray: "Re: Walnut Creek CD-ROM Morality"
Previous message: Ron C. Carman: "Re: Walnut Creek CD-ROM Morality"
In reply to: Ron C. Carman: "Re: Walnut Creek CD-ROM Morality"
Next in thread: angus@cgl.citri.edu.au: "Re: Walnut Creek CD-ROM Morality"
Next in thread: James D. Murray: "Re: Walnut Creek CD-ROM Morality"

> Succinct, but again false. WC sells access all right -- to a
> specifically chosen set of documents.

I believe this statement to be false. More accurately, I believe this
statement to be as true for Walnut Creek as it is for UUNet. I can
call up UUNet and order a specific set of documents (to be delivered
by phone) that is a pretty exact match to what Walnut Creek is
selling, in that I can purchase a newsfeed of news.answers.

The difference is that Walnut Creek provides a mechanism for those who
object to have documents they hold a copyright on pulled. UUNet isn't
that courteous.

> And selling access to a
> specific document or set of documents is *no different* than selling
> the documents themselves.

So, why is what UUNet does in selling a news.answers feed different
from what Walnut Creek does in selling the same set of documents?

<mike

Next message: James D. Murray: "Re: Walnut Creek CD-ROM Morality"
Previous message: Ron C. Carman: "Re: Walnut Creek CD-ROM Morality"
In reply to: Ron C. Carman: "Re: Walnut Creek CD-ROM Morality"
Next in thread: angus@cgl.citri.edu.au: "Re: Walnut Creek CD-ROM Morality"
Next in thread: James D. Murray: "Re: Walnut Creek CD-ROM Morality"

[ Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive | Search Mail Archive | Authors | Usenet ]
[ 1993 | 1994 | 1995 | 1996 | 1997 ]