Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 17:18:08 CDT
Reply-To: Public-Access Computer Systems Forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: Public-Access Computer Systems Forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Edward Vielmetti <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: (fwd) Gopher License - Actual Data... I'm very disappointed.
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
As the commercialization of the Internet moves forward there are
going to be fits and starts along the way. One of the questions,
which has come up again and again, is "how are we going to fund
development of tools that tend to get used for free".
I would guess that these licensing terms for gopher are not going to
be one of the answers to that question, in much the same way that
networks charging by the byte for access is not the way to encourage
archive site development. As someone who has spent a bunch of time
in the past years developing, building, debugging, describing, and
encouraging the use of tools like Gopher, this sort of ham handed
pricing of the use of what we thought was a _pro bono publico_ project
is really not a good thing.
I would be *happy* to support the continued development of gopher, other
tools that work with gopher, and other network information services
and resoruces. I think a lot of other people feel the same way. In
particular I'm looking forward to developing on-line information services
that are much easier to use and more integrated with the "internet way"
than traditional on-line vendors like Dialog, Lexis, etc etc that
present the researcher with clunky 1970's interfaces. But charging
people who just want to deliver information (for *free*!) a big pile
of money to use their code is not, IMHO, the way to go about doing it.
Edward Vielmetti, vice president for research, Msen Inc. [log in to unmask]
Msen Inc., 628 Brooks, Ann Arbor MI 48103 +1 313 998 4562 (fax: 998 4563)
to subscribe to the Msen _Internet Review_ list please send mail to
[log in to unmask], with the text "subscribe review"
Forwarded message:
From: [log in to unmask] (Rob Raisch)
Newsgroups: comp.infosystems.gopher
Subject: Gopher License - Actual Data... I'm very disappointed.
Summary: The current commercial gopher license leaves a lot to be desired.
I just received the current gopher license agreement from UMinn, and to
say the very least, I am very disappointed. This is not the agreement
"that supports the community" that I had expected, and in point of fact,
is designed to punish commercial providers who wish to merely provide
non-commercial information to the Internet.
A commercial site who:
a. is accessible from the Internet
b. offers no products or services for sale or lease through this
server, and
c. does not charge for access to, or information contain on,
the server
is required to pay a 1st year license fee of $5000.00 per server.
Succeeding years will be charged at $2500.00 per server.
You read that correctly, I am afraid, five thousand dollars fee, simply
to enrich the informational content of the Global Internet.
Other details are:
no connection to the Global Internet,
no selling or leasing,
no charge to connect,
$1,000.00/yr. plus $1.00 per client over 100
$ 500.00/yr after the 1st
connection to the Global Internet
selling and leasing a product of service
no charge to connect,
$10,000.00/yr.
$ 5,000.00/yr after the 1st
connection to the Global Internet
pay to connect or pay for information
7.5% of the total amount charged for the service
Mark, Paul Yen, Fahad, et. al., congratulations. You have may have succeeded
in accomplishing something which it takes a large corporation years of
practice and many hundreds of thousands of dollars to do:
You've killed the product before it ever leaves your door.
--Paul Lindner writes:
--I know that the UofMN will take a moderate stance on these matters.
--You're not going to see another IPX etal here.
--
--Greed would kill gopher, believe me..
I believe you Paul, really I do. I am curious to know, though, how do you
define the word: moderate?
</rr> (speaking as an individual and a concerned Internaut)
