Janis Kracht wrote in a message to Thom LaCosta:

> Janis Kracht wrote in a message to Thom LaCosta:


>> Another reason is covered under US law, that shareware is a
>> distribution method, and authors do not lose their rights to their
>> products by allowing them to be distributed. While your file isn't
>> shareware, the majority of the Filegate distribution is, and must
>> be handled as outlined in the filegate policy document (which
>> you've probably never taken the time to read).

>You're right...I never have...and I can't seem to find a message from
>you over
> all the years telling me to so.  And I also can;t seem to find any messages
> from any of my uplinks prior to this time telling me to read it.

 JK> Mieux vaut tard que jamais... 

Geez...and I thought English was the official language of Fidonet.  Pity
you pull regs on one thing and ignore them on another.



 JK> and reading that file is no one's job
 JK> but your own.  Like Ross said, you'd think you'd want to protect
 JK> your list. 

That doesn't address what I pointed out before....that is you and others
were content to distribute the file in the past without all the
"regs".  I'm more than willing to admidt I didn't read the
regs...and long as you'll admit that you never used them as a club in the
past.



 JK> I find it funny that you have given people unbelievable crap when
 JK> someone else updated a moderator's echo who is not the elisted
 JK> moderator.. and yet when the filegate does something similar (and
 JK> it has been doing this since well before 1994) you balk at the
 JK> idea??? What's wrong with this picture?? 

Unlike you, when I noticed sometthing that might be a problem, I
communicated with folks....but I guess it took quite a few attempts by
Shannon to get the file into distribution before we heard from you and the
regs that you never imposed on the ELIST in the past.


cya,
thom
http://www.tlchost.net/echolist/ 
--- GEcho 1.20/Pro