🚀 go-pugleaf

>
>I would like to think that, eventually, the improper usage of shareware,
>that is, the usage of shareware against the license agreement, would be
>viewed as if the user were one of those spitting on the sidewalk: vulgar,
>crass, anti-social, and disgusting.
>

Shareware has no license agreement (legal contract) involved.

No signature -- no contract.

If both sides don't benefit then there's no legal contract.  When a
package comes across the net it's mine to use already -- so I gain
nothing through such an agreement.

So the shareware hucksters are the anti-social and disgusting ones
for foisting their scam on the rest of us.

A request for a donation is fine by me, and I'll pay it if I like
the software enough.  A demand is not okay.  I have no respect for
the sleaze-balls that lie to your face and try to coerce you to send
them money on false pretenses.

If anyone wants to start a fund to sue one of these jerks as an example,
please contact me, I'll contribute.  An injunction against the "you must
pay" notices would be enough.

I get the impression that they think if they spread their scam around
enough, and say "it's the law" enough, and create an association...
That somehow they'll become legitimate; that the laws will just have
to change to suit their new reality.

-- 
Richard Foulk		richard@pegasus.uucp
			richard%pegasus.uucp@nosc.mil
			richard@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu