Re: Walnut Creek CD-ROM Morality

James D. Murray (jdm@netcom.com)
Sun, 18 Dec 1994 21:49:09 -0800 (PST)

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Tom Limoncelli: "Changed my mind: The CD-ROM should get explict permission"
Previous message: Mike Meyer: "Re: Walnut Creek CD-ROM Morality"
Maybe in reply to: angus@cgl.citri.edu.au: "Walnut Creek CD-ROM Morality"
Next in thread: Mike Meyer: "Re: Walnut Creek CD-ROM Morality"
Reply: Mike Meyer: "Re: Walnut Creek CD-ROM Morality"

> > 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?
>
Because by posting our FAQs on Usenet we are agreeing to have standard
Usenet information providers (e.g. UUNet) distribute our copyrighted
documents. Very few people consider Walnut Creek to be a standard Usenet
information provider. If they did, then all this bickering would not be
taking place.

BTW, this is an "ethical" issue and not a "moral" one.

James D. Murray POB 70 Tel: 714.288.0141 jdm@netcom.com Orange, CA 92666 USA Fax: 310.407.5257

Maintainer of the Graphics File Formats FAQ on comp.graphics and coauthor of the O'Reilly book "Encyclopedia of Graphics File Formats".

Next message: Tom Limoncelli: "Changed my mind: The CD-ROM should get explict permission"
Previous message: Mike Meyer: "Re: Walnut Creek CD-ROM Morality"
Maybe in reply to: angus@cgl.citri.edu.au: "Walnut Creek CD-ROM Morality"
Next in thread: Mike Meyer: "Re: Walnut Creek CD-ROM Morality"
Reply: Mike Meyer: "Re: Walnut Creek CD-ROM Morality"

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