- Psiwin Contacts Syncrhonization

- Fair, Fairness, Freeware

- Re. Freeware requiring registration, support

- Re: The Digest V1 # 730 13

- Paste of some headers, copied from the "Message" view ofan MC218

- Generosity

- Copyright and copywrong

- Strange Data system; Re: Printing emails (2 Ian)

- Repair centre in Vancouver or North America

- Setting up data connection preferences

- Re: Nokia 6230 and S5mx

- Re: Therbligs

- Re: 'Non-existant' battery problem of the Revo

- Re: Freeware (and shareware)

Date: 13 Apr 2005 05:13:29 +0700
From: Patrick Warner <address truncated>
Subject: Psiwin Contacts Syncrhonization

Hi all

I synchronize my agenda and contacts with my 5MX.

My company recently changed from an old Groupwise email system to Outlook 2003.

I have succesfully managed to sync agenda and email, but when I try to sync contacts, I only get a small portion of the around 400 contacts on my Psion which make it to Outlook.

I have tried deleting the sync task and deleting all the Outlook contacts to start again several times, but each time I get the same result.  Usually only about 20 to 30 contacts make it across.

Does anyone have any idea what could cause this?

Do I need to reinstall Psiwin 2.3.3?  Outlook was installed after Psiwin, so maybe if I reinstall Psiwin that might help.  That said, the agenda and email sync seems to be working fine whereas I would expect nothing to work if the synchronization was not installed correctly.

If reinstalling, I assume Psiwin 2.3.3 includes the latest Outlook email synchronization - I don't need to install the patches that Psion released back a few years ago to improve contacts syncrhonization?

Lastly, if I reinstall Psiwing 2.3.3 will I lose my existing agenda sync settings?

thanks
Patrick.

Date: 13 Apr 2005 07:26:10 +0700
From: Edo Vucurovic <address truncated>
Subject: Fair, Fairness, Freeware

I've been following discussions about fairness (freeware, shareware etc...) with enourmous interest. Especially when some unresolved questions of same kind came across, after I have, quite recently, released a peace of freeware. There have appeared strong complaints about lack of any help&instructions for using the application. The complaints came close to the argument of unfairness. Although I have clearly stated, in the release notes, that it was quite impossible for me to supply a proper and usual help file for such a huge application (with enormous number of features). I couldn't prepare help file simply because I didn't have time to do it and it would delay the release for unpredictable time. At the same time, I was asked (hurried up) to release it.
So, it's been a huge dilemma for me, to relase it as it is, or not at all. So, I gave it as it was, plain application, no instructions for use. To me, as an author, it's difficult to comprehend whether and how the average users could come to grips with it, w/o proper instructions. I've been convinced from my friends that application is, anyway, aimed at advanced users, who would easily get by. But, I can see from the responses I got, that it is not quite, even with that category of users. So, have I been unfair releasing such a _crippled_ application? Or it was a good decision to release it as it is, than not to release it at all? From the number of people that use the application (60 dnloads in first 24 hours after latest version released) I can conclude that users really put the effort to comprehend the application and try to get it usefull for themselves.

Best regards,
Edo

Date: 13 Apr 2005 08:08:52 +0700
From: Ian Chapple <address truncated>
Subject: Re. Freeware requiring registration, support

Phil,
>>Ian (Chapple), the term "unfair" must be subjective. I, among others, think this concept (freeware that *must* be registered) is unfair. You disagree. Neither of us can persuade the other so we should now agree to disagree!<<

You're being somewhat disingenuous. Your original argument was *not* about freeware which required registration, but about the abandonment of such software; your original complaint was "An appropriate macro should be very easy to write but I find this approach to free software rather galling. Protecting OPL programs/macros against RevTran is one thing but crippling free software unless it is registered and *then* abandoning it is a little unfair.")

As I already said, I'm not sure that I see much point in forcing users to register freeware, although Rolf has made a strong argument as to why that might have been the case here. Also, both Rolf and Chris have made good points about the level of support required or expected of software
authors. However, I think you would have a tough job making any of these arguments stick in the case of freeware or open source software; as a freeware author, you can be sued for ie. patent infringement, as happened to someone in the US who was sued by Microsoft (on the basis of a rubbish patent by the way), but actually being sued for not providing sufficient support is, in my opinion, highly unlikely. As I've said before, getting any kind of support from commercial software companies is nigh on impossible, and the level of support provided by many, if not most, freeware authors is far superior. However, there is no *obligation* to provide such support, and even if the author does choose to support his software, there is no obligation to do so indefinitely.

Cheers, Ian.

Date: 13 Apr 2005 09:36:08 +0700
From: Bernard Hill <address truncated>
Subject: Re: The Digest V1 # 730 13

To Eric Lindsay:

>I must admit that it still isn't clear to me whether the various >Symbian phones that can connect to email and the web also include >access to their data adaptor (modem) from a connected PDA or computer. >
>My Ericsson SH888 works well via IrDA to connect my Psion and my old >Toshiba laptop (with an unreliable battery, Rolf B) to the internet. >However with the second last of my SH888 batteries becoming unreliable >(nod to Rolf B), I'll have to eventually seek replacements for my two >SH888 (unless I find more batteries).

I have had no problems finding new batteries. Try eBay. They come in various thicknesses but still fit the phone OK as they are sat on the outside.

>Also, more recent laptops don't have serial ports or IrDA.  My >Macintosh offers only Bluetooth and USB, so I can't use the SH888 with >that anyway.

Seeing that I need to be in email contact when I go on holiday in the Scottish Highlands, my various email configurations are:

netBook to Travel Modem if a phone socket is available.
netBook to IR port of a P800 which I use most
netBook to IR port of SH888 as backup

(you can't beat the netBook keyboard for serious writing)

and a 5mx to the same 3 connections as a backup.

I have 3 PAYG sims for Vodaphone, Virgin and O2 because reception varies so much in the Highlands.

To Rolf:
><< * Commercial software; the author is earning a living from his >software being sold, so he is obligated to fix bugs and add features >requested by users.
>    * Shareware; the author is earning some extra money (on top of his >main job) from selling his own software, so he is obligated to fix >bugs, and is expected (but not required) to add requested features.

There's really no difference between these. The old notion of "shareware" as being different has gone. I am a 1-man software house earning all my living on pretty much one product range. I sell "Music Publisher"

a) from my website with a downloadable evaluation copy
b) from orders from shareware sites (they usually point to my evaluation copy rather than having their own copy of the evaluation program)
c) from shops carrying the software which is packaged
d) from dealers specialising in music software both in the UK and in the USA

In response to an order I send out a CD and 120 page manual.

I am not obligated to add features requested: customers can request features which will be redundant by the next release, or which go
against the philosophy of the product. However I do implement a great number of requested features (and since I use the product myself I request features myself too <g>)

I *am* obligated to fix bugs as the customer has paid a 3-figure sum for the software. Bugs are fixed within hours normally and a new version is supplied at no charge.

>    * Freeware; the author gains no money, but by making his software >publically available he is implying that he will provide limited >support - he is obligated to fix bugs, but is not expected to add >requested features (however he may do so).

I do supply some software on a "this is what you get" basis. I do not promise to fix bugs. However it is mainly information-only software and not critical to anyone's usage. However I do fix bugs when they are
found (mainly inaccuracies in the information).

>    * Open Source; the author is providing complete public access to >his software, thereby releasing him from any implied support issues - >he is expected (but not required) to fix bugs, but is not expected to >add requested features (however he may do so). >>
>
>Food for discussion as it looks to me that the major difference between >commercial software and shareware is that you pay up front for a >commercial application  while you can 'test drive' a shareware >application before you buy it (or not). Whether you can live from the >proceeds depends on how successful your software is. Irrespective of >whether you've chosen to sell your software on a commercial or
>shareware basis.

Most "commercial" software has some sort of evaluation copy these days, and anyone limiting how his software is purchased is restricting sales. However there may be sound reasons for such a limit: for instance the cost and time of creating packaging may be a factor in not going "commercial".

>
>As for technical support and the fixing of bugs, please note that EC >regulations have laid down a number of minimum requirements. One of
>them is that the supplier is responsible for the correct functioning of >what (s)he supplies.

Do you have a reference for that?

>Meaning that your 'expected but not required' for the authors of open >source software no longer applies. The author has
>to fix the bugs users report. And it's no longer necessary for the user >to demonstrate there's a bug in the software. A reasonable suspicion is >already sufficient. The author has then to demonstrate that what the >user sees isn't a bug.

If you are correct in that then this is an impossible requirement.

1. To fix it, a bug must be reproducible.

2. Very frequently the bugs "found" in my software are most often attributable to provable bugs in printer, video or scanner drivers, and just sometimes the OS. Where would this requirement leave me then? The user may be quite convinced that the bug is in my software but it would require a driver upgrade to prove otherwise (and that's the proof that
my software is OK: the new driver fixes it). I simply cannot demonstrate that there isn't a bug if the customer refuses to upgrade.

>
>Other requirements concern the documentation that's supplied in the >form of help files and/or manual. One of the things you *have* to >supply is an installation manual describing the minimum hardware and >operating system requirements, how to install the application and how
>to deal with installation difficulties. The rest of the documentation >can then be in the help files. Thing is, the author is expected to >supply documentation in the language of the EC countries when >requested. In case somebody in Greece can't come to grips with the >English manual and/or help files the author has to supply Greek
>versions when asked to do so. There are also a number of minimum >requirements when it comes to the contents of manuals and help files. >I'm afraid that the documentation supplied with most shareware, >freeware and open source software don't meet these minimum requirements.

Nor most shareware or even commercial software. I have considered translating to French and German but the presence of such a version implies that support is available in that version, and I could not provide that.

How many languages are there in the EU? There are at least 3 in the UK for a start.

If you are correct then it sounds like another completely ridiculous EU regulation which is ill-thought-out and impossible to implement or enforce, and which would deprive English-speaking customers across the world of most software. Am I supposed to test my users as to their ability to speak and read English? Am I to refuse to supply to non-English countries, or non-English speakers within the UK? What?

References, please!

(And bear in mind also that Windows doesn't even have a UK English version. There is nowhere you can change "favorite" to "favourite" or "color" to "colour")

--
Bernard Hill
Braeburn Software
Author of Music Publisher system
Music Software written by musicians for musicians
http://www.braeburn.co.uk
Selkirk, Scotland

Date: 13 Apr 2005 09:55:52 +0700
From: Giorgio <address truncated>
Subject: Paste of some headers, copied from the "Message" view ofan MC218

Dear friends,
 
 I have an MC218 and I would need to Copy from my "Message" (equivalent of the Psion "Mail") view , some of the headers of my messages.
 
I successully use the Select and Copy functions but when I try to Paste them  inside another new message, a Word or a Jotter file ...simply NO WAY !
 
 :-(((
 
 Could you please kindly let me know how to do it ?
 
 I suppose that the same system also applies in case I want to
 copy and paste any screen view and this would have an even
 broader interest.
 
 Many grateful thanks in advance
 
 :-)
 
 and my warmest regards
 
 
 
 Giorgio Odazio
 
 Rome, Italy
 
--

Date: 13 Apr 2005 11:38:26 +0700
From: Phil Aypee <address truncated>
Subject: Generosity

Hi Folks,

Itamar, a generous and honest gift can be deadly to the recipient. If the donor says it is faulty then there is no further onus on h(er)im. If (s)he doesn't then there *must* be an onus to make sure the gift works properly (within reason, of course - if the backlight on a 5mx doesn't work there's no danger but if the CF contacts are unreliable you might lose vital data).

But that doesn't detract from the generosity of the giver!

Happy days,
Phil.

"To stay young requires unceasing cultivation
of the ability to unlearn old falsehoods."

http://www.philaypee.co.uk/index.html

Date: 13 Apr 2005 11:38:32 +0700
From: Phil Aypee <address truncated>
Subject: Copyright and copywrong

Hi Folks,

Rolf (Brunsting), in my *opinion* a software author has the right to do what (s)he will (as long as no-one else is harmed, of course). In my *opinion* this applies to all and sundry. In my *opinion* it is part of a nebulous concept, that of "free will".

And Rolf, your comments, addressed specifically to me, were about me "insisting", your own word. On reading that others, coming late to the discussion, may assume, wrongly, that I was "insisting" that Mr Emmanuel keep his registration system open; I wasn't.

And I still don't know why you implied such. Sorry.

I think that something can be legal but immoral and unfair. In South Africa apartheid was legal but immoral and unfair (in my *opinion*). In the case in point, far more prosaic than racism, freeware that requires registration is legal but unfair, maybe even immoral, in my *opinion*. It worries me a little that you apparently think that something legal must be both moral and fair. It also worries me that you still seem to think that fairness is an irrelevance.

With both points I disagree.

But I'm glad you agree that authors may retain copyright on software they give away.

I'm don't understand the point you're trying to make with the car tale. No-one's objecting to another's taste in this discussion.

The rest of your post seems to be further coverage of the rights of software authors and copyright, apparently restating the points I made but in a different way.

Happy days,
Phil.

"It's true that money talks.
It usually says 'Goodbye'."

http://www.philaypee.co.uk/index.html

Date: 13 Apr 2005 13:53:17 +0700
From: Jack <address truncated>
Subject: Strange Data system; Re: Printing emails (2 Ian)

Hi all,

- My old (recent motherboard) (m)nB started to open data  files with difficulty: "Not enough memory" occuring without reason.
I then discovered two strange (new) Data.aif(3K) and Data.app(1K) in C/System/apps/data. Does these aliens possibly came from an uncontrolled epocSync X my "apps-upgraded" revo?

- To Ian, who copy-paste emails to print them (Digest#730)
Hi Ian,
I have no pb printing incoming msg with nB + HPdeskjet350 although in very small font size...even Date and Priority reads.
The nB Help ("print") gives indication about fax (not emails) printing.
Does "print to File" via General work with your msgs?
PS1 Does your useful GlucoMon will oneday be transposed to mx or revo?
PS2 I finally managed to find the Rec-bin macro URL ;-)

All the best to the everdying-lasting psions

Jack
-
The older I get, the more vivid is my recollection of things that never happened. Marc Twain
--

Date: 13 Apr 2005 16:20:00 +0700
From: Jim Watson-Gove <address truncated>
Subject: Repair centre in Vancouver or North America

<<Does  anyone  know  of  a  repair centre in Canada or North America for Psions?>>

Dave,

www.410palm.co
<address truncated>BR> Palmtop Support Services
1235 Bay Street
10th Floor
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
M5R 3KR

Phone 416-410-7256

Shiva Naipaul is the guy I've done business with.

Good luck

jim - port townsend, wa

Date: 13 Apr 2005 19:05:03 +0700
From: Kevin Thorne <address truncated>
Subject: Setting up data connection preferences

Reply to Gary:

<There is one thing I can say, though, about the Pocket PC running Windows Mobile 2003SE.  There are 3rd party applications today that make it a breeze to configure the Pocket PC device to connect to GPRS, HSCSD and standard GSM through a mobile phone.  Just fill in the blanks as you go through the setup process and - presto! - you can connect to the Internet on the fastest available mode for email or surfing.>

I'm pleased to say then that the Nokia 9500 can go one better than this as it can already do this straight from out of the box - no 3rd party software required :-)

Regards
Kevin Thorne

Date: 13 Apr 2005 19:56:14 +0700
From: Colin Messer <address truncated>
Subject: Re: Nokia 6230 and S5mx

Rolf wrote:
> I want to use my Nokia 6230 as GPRS-Modem for the S5mx.
> Could someone give my hints, which settings are necessary for both
> the mobile phone and the Psion machine.

I recently changed from a 6510 to a 6230 and found to my delight that the GPRS setting worked without change.  These settings are for Vodafone, so the access point is "internet" and the user name and password is "web".

Psion settings
******************
Modem Settings:
============
**Modem**
Speed: 115200
Connect by: Infrared
Fax Class: auto
---------------------
**Initialisation**
Init. (reset) string: AT&F&K4
Data init. string: at+cgdcont=,"IP","internet"
---------------------
**Advanced**
Flow control: Hardware (RTS/CTS)
Terminal Detect (DSR/DTR): blank
Carrier Detect (DCD): blank
Modem Type: Mobile

Internet Settings:
============
**Service**
Connection Type: Dial-up
Use smart dialing: blank
Standard dial-up number: *99#
---------------------
**Account**
Manual Login: blank
Username: web
Password: web
---------------------
**Addresses**
Get IP address from server: ticked
Get DNS address from server: ticked
---------------------
**Login**
Use login script: blank
---------------------
**Advanced**
Enable PPP extensions: blank
Allow plain text authentication: ticked
Use call back: blank

Nokia 6230 Settings
***********************
Menu > Settings > Connectivity > GPRS
GPRS connection: When needed
GPRS modem settings / Active access point: internet

Regards
Colin

Date: 13 Apr 2005 22:11:46 +0700
From: Martin Guthrie <address truncated>
Subject: Re: Therbligs

Reply to: Phil Aypee

> The "therblig" was a real unit named by Frank Gilbreth, a
> pioneering work study engineer. A largely fictitious account
> of part of his life was filmed as "Cheaper by the Dozen" with
> Clifton Webb.

Quite so Phil.  A factual account of his life was published in a book of the same name by two of his dozen progeny (hence the title).  He was, if memory serves, the inventor of the 'time & motion studies' concept as well as the Qwerty keyboard (or Qwertz, Azerty, etc. depending on your language of choice) - we all on this digest probably owe him a note of thanks.  He was - IMHO - an unsung American hero.  The book may well be out of print these days but if I recall correctly was quite simply the funniest book I have ever read.  It should (again IMHO) be mandatory reading at school for anyone ever born into a family - if for no other reason than it will greatly exercise the belly muscles.

Best regards,
Martin Guthrie
—————————
www.pscience5.net
www.freepoc.org
www.foxpop.co.uk

Date: 13 Apr 2005 22:46:38 +0700
From: Chris S Handley
Subject: Re: 'Non-existant' battery problem of the Revo

Rolf B wrote:
> There's a very big difference between not always agreeing
> with what people write about the Revo Battery Problem and
> saying that the problem doesn't exist.  There are a number of
> possible causes for the behaviour we call the Battery
> Problem. One of them is not following Psion's instructions as
> mentioned in the manual. Another is that the symptoms of
> rechargeable batteries nearing the end of their life are
> quite similar to those of the Battery Problem. We therefore
> can't simply exclude user error and dying batteries as the
> cause of a Revo user's experience.

I think the name is quite a reasonable one, given that the symptoms are power (i.e. battery) related, and that there is no agreed-upon cause.  Although I do apologise (again) for wrongly interpreting part of what you originally said.


I don't wish to drag this issue on, but there are a fair number of quite competent users, who have usually had their Revo repaired or replaced a number of times, which I think makes it very unlikely that they didn't read the manual after the first problem.  Also, I'd suspect that Psion would replace the batteries during repair (as they cost so little), and thus that would rule out the battery life issue to.

Personally I've experienced the problem on every Revo that I have owned, except when I have religously followed my self-devised charging rules.  (As soon as I deviate slightly from them, as happend just before I replied to your previous post, the problem will appear.)


Of course, for users who's lifestyle & behaviour means that tend to charge the Revo in a way which doesn't cause problems (and I have spoken to a few), it can be quite hard for them to believe that the problem really exists!  And the issue is clouded further by the fact that (as you rightly point out) some users don't follow the manual on charging it, that the NiMH battery has a finite life anyway, and that some users charge using a non-standard PSU which provides too little current.

---
Chris Handley

Visit the web page email.cshandley.co.uk for my address

Date: 13 Apr 2005 22:46:39 +0700
From: Chris S Handley
Subject: Re: Freeware (and shareware)

On 12 Apr 2005, Itamar Engelsman wrote:
> the writer of commercial software is of course required to
> fix bugs, but why is he required to add features required or
> requested by users ? IMHO when you buy a software package you
> buy what you get and future updates can sometimes be for
> free, other times against payment and other times there will
> not be any. But there certainly is no commitment to this
> effect.

When I said "obligated", I suppose I was refering to a moral obligation, although legal obligations are often created for the strongest moral ones.

My generalisations were obviously a broad brush, but in general I feel that if I have paid quite a bit of money for some software, then the software author should pay strong attention to what his (or her) users are requesting.  Of course, it would be unreasonable to expect that wierd or very hard requests should be heeded.  Perhaps I should modify it to say this:

* Commercial software; the author is earning a living from his software being sold, so he is obligated to fix bugs AND ADD MOST SENSIBLE FEATURES REQUESTED BY USERS.

If I only paid a few pounds/dollars for a (simple) program, then I would put it in the "shareware" category, as far as the responsibility list goes.


> Furthermore, when releasing freeware it is very well possible
> that at a future dat the author decides to discontinue his
> software for a variety of reasons, and I don't think there is
> a commitment to continue and support this software forever
> and ever. How many EPOC writers have just disappeared from
> the "face of the world" ?

Actually, I feel that ALL software (not just freeware) can only morally be abandoned by the author, if he makes it open source.  The only exception would be if the software was very simple (and so easily replaced).  Also, I would probably accept something being made (or staying as) just freeware, if it was already very bug free and fully featured, or if shared IP would make open source tricky.

One motivating factor for me writing the responsibility list was to provide an explanation for these feelings, and I think it does so fairly well.


> Even stronger, commercial software houses discontinue their
> support for older versions of programs once newer ones have
> come out. If you continue working with the older ones and
> have a problem, you will have to upgrade. There is no
> commitment to support unlimited in time.

This was an aspect which I didn't directly address, but it seems obvious to me that you must expect to pay for the occasional upgrade, and therefore older versions will be abandoned - just as authors of freeware apps usually no-longer support very outdated versions of their software.

Regards,
Chris Handley

Visit the web page email.cshandley.co.uk for my address

============

On 11 Apr 2005, ian chapple wrote:
>> * Freeware; the author gains no money, but by making his
>> software publically available he is implying that he will
>> provide limited support - he is obligated to fix bugs, but
>> is not expected to add requested features (however he may do
>> so).

> I also think you have to be a bit careful when using words
> like "obligated" when relating to freeware;

As I said to Itamar, I am refering to a moral obligation, not a legal one.  I don't think that I have to be careful in stating what I expect & what think is reasonable.  (The list was also an attempt to state what obligations I have, as an author of open source software, so that I can be sure to behave reasonably.)


> I agree that any
> author worth his salt *will* provide some support, *will* fix
> bugs and may implement suggested improvements, but I do not
> believe that he is obligated to do so.

> but this feeling of obligation comes from the author himself and
> not from anyone else.

I'm afraid that I have to disagree with you Ian, although not completely.  I feel that there IS a moral obligation to support the free software as stated.  While the feeling of moral obligation may arise within the individual, I think that it reflects the general expectations of others, and those who don't follow that obligation are morally wrong (even if they don't feel it).

We risk treading on sticky philosophical issues here!  Are moral obligations decided by the majority, or are they immutable & there for humans to discover?  Personally I'd say the answer lies somewhere between both extremes, with the immutable part being decided by our evolutionary past :)

Regards,
Chris Handley

Visit the web page email.cshandley.co.uk for my address

============

On 12 Apr 2005, Rolf Brunsting wrote:
> Food for discussion as it looks to me that the major
> difference between commercial software and shareware is that
> you pay up front for a commercial application while you can
> 'test drive' a shareware application before you buy it (or
> not). Whether you can live from the proceeds depends on how
> successful your software is. Irrespective of whether you've
> chosen to sell your software on a commercial or
> shareware basis.

As I said to Itamar, I am obviously painting with a broad brush, but in general commercial software is expensive, and shareware is cheap(er), and that was the basis on which I wrote what I did.  If someone can't live based on sales of commercial software, then I'd suggest that they won't be in business very long, so that the software isn't viable commercially.  For shareware, I would be very surprised if more than 1 percent of authors make a living out of it (rather than just as a side-line), particularly if they only have a couple of applications.  (WinZip is one likely exception, although personally I'd classify it as almost commercial.)


> It's also not necessarily true that the author of commercial
> software is obliged to "add features requested by users".
<snip>

I think I have already answered this in my reply to Itamar.


> As for technical support and the fixing of bugs, please note
> that EC regulations have laid down a number of minimum
> requirements. One of them is that the supplier is responsible
> for the correct functioning of what (s)he supplies. Meaning
> that your 'expected but not required' for the authors of open
> source software no longer applies.

If that is so, then that is (another) ridiculous EC law, although it could probably be circumvented using some other more reasonable laws.

I'll continue doing what (I feel) is morally right & reasonable, since our laws ought to reflect that -  and usually do, particularly since (thankfully) precedent plays a large role in determining how law is interpreted & applied.


<snip more ridiculous EC laws>
> I'm afraid that the
> documentation supplied with most shareware, freeware and open
> source software don't meet these minimum requirements.

I very much doubt any of that really could be applied (in the real world) to freeware, let-alone open source, and so again I'll keep on doing what I feel is reasonable.

I can imagine that some of those laws could apply to shareware, which is one more reason to release stuff as freeware - or make it commercial if it really is good enough (which isn't the case for most shareware IMHO).


BTW, if a law is bad, one of the best ways to fight it is for everyone to ignore it, and thus get it tested in court.  From what I understand, this is what has (partly) happened to the DMCA in America, and they have (or are going to) pass some further laws which watered it down.

Regards,
Chris Handley

Visit the web page email.cshandley.co.uk for my address