|
Re: [PL DISCUSSION] Is ePrompter Freeware?
de Ron May 01/15/2007 08:46
On Mon, 15 Jan 2007 13:58:29 -0500, Susan Bugher <sebugher@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> Ron May wrote:
>
> > Honestly, considering some comments I've seen assuming the worst
> > motives and making suggestions that the author MIGHT attempt to
> > deliberately sabotage the program someday by using the auto-update
> > feature as a "back door," I'd be a little embarrassed to extend the
> > invitation. It's a little like one of those discussions you'd rather
> > "keep in the family" and not advertise to the world for fear of
> > ridicule. I mean, sheesh, it's a great free piece of software. You
> > would think some things could be accepted at face value until/unless
> > there's some reasonable basis for assuming ottherwise.
>
> The sterling character of the authors has NOT been questioned. The issue
> is not whether the authors WILL do something, it's whether they CAN.
>
> Susan
But UNLESS you make the ASSUMPTION UP FRONT that they will (and you
can't do that WITOUT calling "The sterling character of the authors"
into question,) there's no reason to say the program is "NOT freeware"
beacause if they DON'T, the program is free to use "for as long as you
wish."
My point has been that the determination should be based on the facts
and circumstances AS THEY ARE, rather than some nebulous theorhetical
future possibility. I think that's the essence of the difference of
opinion, and, while your scenario is POSSIBLE, I think (obviously <g>)
that my approach reflects more common sense.
If my view is adopted, and it later turns out that I'm wrong, then the
program will no longer be freeware and we can deal with it at that
time.
If your view is adopted, it will be "OFF TOPIC" to even DISCUSS
ePrompter in ACF simply on the basis of how an auto-update feature
MIGHT (or far more likely, might NOT) be used.
--
Ron M.