[191] in bcs-newton
Re: Royalties
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (laird@marble.com)
Sat Aug 21 18:25:30 1993
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 1993 18:25:06 -0500
To: kentborg@world.std.com
From: laird@marble.com
Cc: npc@dtw.com, bcs-newton@world.std.com
>I was undecided whether to post or mail this. Well, the World's mail
>is down at the moment, so npc gets it (and the next one):
>
>I got some mail from PIEDTS finally. There was not much in it, but
>the Q&A section did have one detail we will all be interested in.
Could you forward the whole thing to us, if it's not personal, that is...
>>The Newton Toolkit uses copyrighted Apple software to create Newton
>>applications and content. Apple will charge a royalty for the use of this
>>software.
>
>So folks, it is looking pretty true. It also looks just like a stupid
>old compiler license. Their only enforcement is their copright on
>NTK. I am not a lawyer, and so am wlling to try to actualy state a
>legal opinion clearly: we can use NTK as much as we like as a
>development and debugging tool, but if we can ship software that
>contains no NTK-created bits, we can avoid the stamp tax entirely.
This is the same thing that they said at MacWorld when I asked them about
it. Basically it looks like their business model is that they sell the
Newtons at no profit (or even a loss, possibly) in order to get them into
as many hands as possible, and make money selling time on Apple Online
Services and on a small (1% is pretty minimal) royalty on software. They
reserve the right to audit software publishers, to make sure that the
royalty payments are honest, but don't plan on doing more than
spot-checking since they realize how disruptive and intrusive audits are.
>The "One Percent Solution" will work.
Personally, while I don't like the idea of Apple being able to audit
people, I prefer their business model, which will create a large market and
provide a distribution channel that's quite favorable to independent
programmers (since Apple really wants software to distribute, and plans on
electronic distribution of software, which doesn't cost anything up-front)
I'm pretty happy with it. I have my doubts as to the legal basis for the
royalty, since it looks like everything significant is already in the
Newton's ROMs, but if giving Apple a 1% royalty means that they'll actively
support developers and development tools, I'm delighted to give it to 'em.
- Laird Popkin laird@marble.com
Marble Associates 617/891-5555
