[2281] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: Network access to non-free information
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (sean mclinden)
Tue Feb 4 20:24:49 1992
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 92 18:59:56 -0500
From: sean@dsl.pitt.edu (sean mclinden)
To: com-priv@psi.com, smart@mel.dit.csiro.au
The restricted use document that you suggest and the issues surrounding
it are really not much different than that surrounding traditional copy-
ing of copyrighted material. In that case, as well, the author and publisher
have no guarantees, but there is an honor system and the threat of legal
action to those whoe violate it.
To me the document metaphor becomes much more interesting when one things
of dynamic documents and concepts such as live links. Then you have an issue
similar to that of software licensing for non-copy protected software, i.e.,
you can copy it and use it, but you don't benefit from updates, revisions,
and documentation.
All this is to agree with the implicit point of your posting: You cannot
imagine a perfect system for networking of subscription material unless you
rely on the *social* as well as technical support of the community. I liken
this to the situation with public mailboxes: most of society has to agree
not to dump McDonald's shakes into them or the whole thing breaks down.
Furthermore, I suspect that a lot of issues surrounding how to squeeze every
bit of accountability out of proprietary packet use are obviated by the reality
of what has been called the "reasonable person principle" and the time
honored concept of not biting the hand that feeds you. Newsweek doesn't
begin to recover costs from everyone that reads it and their marketing
efforts are not geared to such an unachievable goal. Rather, they attempt
to compete in the subscription market knowing full well that 1) many of
the people who read it don't pay for it, but also 2) many of the people who
pay for it don't read it.
Still, they make a profit.
Sean
