Volume 4, Number 1 5 January 1987 +---------------------------------------------------------------+ | _ | | / \ | | /|oo \ | | - FidoNews - (_| /_) | | _`@/_ \ _ | | International | | \ \\ | | FidoNet Association | (*) | \ )) | | Newsletter ______ |__U__| / \// | | / FIDO \ _//|| _\ / | | (________) (_/(_|(____/ | | (jm) | +---------------------------------------------------------------+ Editor in Chief: Thom Henderson Chief Procrastinator Emeritus: Tom Jennings FidoNews is the official newsletter of the International FidoNet Association, and is published weekly by SEAdog Leader, node 1/1. You are encouraged to submit articles for publication in FidoNews. Article submission standards are contained in the file ARTSPEC.DOC, available from node 1/1. Copyright (C) 1986, by the International FidoNet Association. All rights reserved. Duplication and/or distribution permitted for noncommercial purposes only. For use in other circumstances, please contact IFNA. HAPPY NEW YEAR Table of Contents 1. EDITORIAL Shareware is Nowhere 2. ARTICLES Curbing Copyright Abuses by Vendors and On-Line Services 3. NOTICES The Interrupt Stack Fidonews Page 2 5 Jan 1987 ================================================================= EDITORIAL ================================================================= Shareware is Nowhere I'm sure many of you have read at least a few of my diatribes about shareware. How many of you listened? Quite a number, I'm sure, but apparently not enough. Quite simply put, shareware is dying out. The signs are all around us. o PC Outline was originally released as shareware, and was even reviewed by PC Week as being better than its non-shareware competition. But the last I heard was that it's now being marketed by Brown Bag Software. o Chris Dunford wrote an elegant command editor for DOS called CED (and no, Chris's middle initial is not "E"). Almost anyone "in the know" about PC's uses CED. It was originally released as shareware. The latest version is called PCED, and is not shareware. o One of the more popular data base programs for the PC is PC-File, a shareware product of Buttonware, Inc. Buttonware has now released a new version of PC-File that is, among other things, relational. It is also not shareware any more. o Bob Hartman has written all sorts of little goodies for FidoNet sysops, including Rovermsg and Renum. These were released as shareware. Bob reports that the total contributions received so far wouldn't buy him and his wife dinner out. Bob is now writing a faster and more powerful alternative to EchoMail. And guess what? It ain't gonna be shareware. o The Headlands Press started the whole shareware phenomenon with its famous PC Talk communications program. They've announced that they're coming out with a new version, and even THAT won't be shareware any longer! I could go on and on. The examples abound. But your own boards provide the best proof of all. When was the last time you saw a really good shareware product come out that wasn't crippled in some way? Sometimes the crippling isn't that bad. For example, the Instant Recall database manager in its shareware version will handle an 80k database, but if you pay the fee you get a NON-shareware version that'll handle a 2 meg database. Other examples include FansiConsole, which comes in a fully functional form, but you have to pay to get the manual before you can figure out how to use it. Then there are Ron Bemis's multitudinous FidoNet utilities that send home notes to papa until you pay for a Fidonews Page 3 5 Jan 1987 registered version. But still, a cripple is a cripple. One way or another, almost all shareware these days is either crippled so you can't use it all, or does something you don't like, or isn't all that good to begin with. (Note that I said ALMOST all! There are always exceptions.) And who's fault is it? Is it the authors' fault? Not at all. Your average software author quite rightly feels that he deserves to be compensated for his work. After a few all nighters chasing one more bug or nailing down one more feature, almost anyone will start to wonder why they're doing all this for nothing in return. No, it's YOUR fault, unless you happen to be one of the statistical few who actually pays for all the shareware you use. Shareware was a noble experiment in trusting the users, and now it's almost over. For a couple of years now shareware authors have been telling you that if you didn't shell out for what you use, then pretty soon you'd stop seeing a cheap bounty of good software. By all appearances, nobody really believed that prediction, so now it's coming to pass. Enjoy shareware while it lasts. It won't last long. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Fidonews Page 4 5 Jan 1987 ================================================================= ARTICLES ================================================================= Curbing Copyright Abuses by Vendors and On-Line Services Date: October 18, 1986 From: Mark J. Welch, Shareware author (The Generic Adventure Game System) P.O. Box 2409, San Francisco, CA 94126 Voice (415) 845-2430 [Berkeley] Fido 161/459 [private, Seadog] BIX 'mwelch' Outline: I. CompuServe II. PC-SIG III. Pink Panther Data Systems IV. Where To Go (for more discussion of the issues) Recently, several unrelated disputes have raised the issue of Shareware authors' rights. I'd like to summarize some of the issues, and point people to where other discussions are also going on. Please note that all text not in quotes is written by me. -mjw I. CompuServe CompuServe Information Services (an H&R Block Company) P.O. Box 20212 5000 Arlington Centre Blvd. Columbus, OH 43220 (800) 848-8199 (614) 457-0802 For a long time, CompuServe (CIS) has claimed copyright to certain portions of its download libraries. Recently, a dispute between CompuServe and a BBS operator resulted in an article inInfoWorld that has sparked a debate over the legitimacy of CompuServe's claims. Apparently, the dispute arose because the BBS operator was downloading programs from CIS and posting them on his bulletin- board system, which either required or requested a fee for subscribers. The following seven paragraphs of text are from a now-widely-distributed message from Neil Shapiro, Sysop of MAUG(tm) on CompuServe: "1) CompuServe received a complaint from the author of a Fidonews Page 5 5 Jan 1987 copyrighted program that his program was being published by Sande's Mousetrap BBS without the author's permission. The author also indicated that Sande had many other non-Public Domain programs on his BBS." "2) CIS asked me to call the BBS and verify the author's complaint. Sande's short bulletin (signed with his nom de plume of "Captain Mac") specifically stated that Sande was going onto GEnie, CompuServe and Delphi every week to download all of their files and that if you sent him $25 to join his service there was no longer any need to join any of the networks. His short bulletin did not state he was downloading public-domain files but said all files and specifically stated commercial redistribution. "3) At the same point in time Sande left a message on MAUG(tm) also stating that all files (not just public-domain) were being offered on his BBS. I deleted that message and sent him an EMAIL reply explaining that many of our files were copyrighted by authors and that it was unethical to take such files without the authors' permission. "4) CIS' lawyers sent Sande a note which did NOT ask him to close his BBS but simply asked that he cease the illegal acts above. "5) Sande left many messages on such networks as FidoNET claiming that CIS had told him to close his BBS and that it was public-domain files that were at issue. This is simply a misleading statement. CIS did not ask him to close his board. The files at issue were copyrighted files which CIS had received author complaints over. "6) It is important to keep in mind that Sande's BBS was a commercial venture. it is also important to keep in mind that Sande specifically stated in his short bulletin that he was making network compilations of data available commercially. "7) CompuServe and MAUG are not attempting to "threaten" any BBS system. BBS systems are the heart and soul of telecommunications. But the sysop of a BBS must operate within certain ethical and legal guidelines. One of these, as should be obvious, is that you do not use a copyrighted file without the permission of the author." A public message (on FidoNet's IFNA echomail conference) about the controversy, from someone who spoke to Shapiro by phone included this summary: "A 'shoot from the hip' analysis of our conversation yields the observation that CIS is not trying to copyright all the stuff on their system, just trying to protect software that does not give permission for public distribution. Another educational insight to this thing is to realize how easy it Fidonews Page 6 5 Jan 1987 is to get things bent out of shape on a telecom network....Also, the sysop who was the object of the CIS threat was way out of line in his behaviour and probably deserved what he got. It was a definite case of violation of copyright laws (remember the phone book analogy...)." At least one FidoNet message suggested that users boycott CompuServe for some amount of time; other suggested that the Fido BBS software not be allowed on-line on CompuServe if the service would claim any copyright ownership to it as a result. The controversy did have one effect: several Shareware software authors began doing their homework on protecting their legal rights (see section IV, below). Rather agressive discussions also started about the topic on virtually every electronic service and many BBSs. I had my own minor dispute with CompuServe a while back: I spent 45 minutes uploading GAGS to the service, and the file was lost. I was charged for the connect time, and decided not to try again. Later, I decided to allow CompuServe to post it, and gave them permission to do so. I don't know if it's still on-line; if it is, it's most likely a very, very old version. Needless to say, CompuServe does not own copyright to GAGS, either. Its responses to the recent dispute make it clear that people can download a few programs from CIS and upload them to other BBSs without any legal problems, provided that the programs' authors allow such redistribution. If anyone hears differently, please let me know. ========================= II. PC-SIG Personal Computer Software Interest Group 1030-D East Duane Ave., Sunnyvale, CA 94086 (408) 730-9291; orders (800) 245-6717, (800) 222-2996 CA [earlier articles on this PC-SIG issue appeared in FidoNews #336 and #338.] PC-SIG may sound like the name of a computer users group, but it's not. PC-SIG is a privately-held, for-profit corporation engaged in the business of selling public- domain and Shareware programs on disks. They charge a fixed fee of $6 each for each disk, plus $4 shipping per order. There are over 500 disks in the PC-SIG library. PC-SIG advertises in many national and regional computer publications (including BYTE, PC, and InfoWorld). Another recent discovery for me is that PC-SIG is in the complete distribution business now. Not Fidonews Page 7 5 Jan 1987 only do they sell disks by mail order and at trade shows, but they have "authorized dealers" in the US and even overseas. My understanding is that the company is owned by Richard Peterson, who is also president. I have also spoken with Hazel Peterson, general manager, and Tom Yarr, vice-president of marketing. PC-SIG's lawyer is Thomas Caudill, 1025 North Fourth St., San Jose, 95112-4942, (408) 298-4844. Shareware authors may recall that in its early days, PC-SIG didn't take much care in compiling its library of public- domain and Shareware titles. Author's titles would be added to the library without permission, and in some cases despite clear requirements that permission had to be requested. For a while, it seemed as if they'd cleaned up their act, by getting permissions and paying at least lip service to the idea that Shareware authors should get contributions. But I believe that several recent actions by PC-SIG are having very serious adverse effects on Shareware authors. The first action brought to my attention was the letter sent out by PC-SIG to vendors whom it believed were improperly using its name and disk numbering scheme. After selling its printed directory through bookstores and allowing other vendors and user groups to use its numbering scheme for several years, PC-SIG now says it will sue anyone who uses the same numbering scheme or, apparently, mentions their name in any way (other than in a disclaimer). PC-SIG has filed one legal action so far, according to its attorney: a million-dollar lawsuit against now-defunct National Public Domain Software (Santa Clara Superior Court, Case no. 605640). A letter from NPDS's proprietor, Paul Jones, says that the suit drove them out of business. I have no problem with PC-SIG's interest in protecting its name. However, their method of doing so is at best misleading, and at worst deliberately calculated to damage the rights of shareware authors. [If anyone would like a copy of any of these letters, please contact me.] In a nine-page threatening letter sent by PC-SIG to several vendors, PC-SIG's attorney makes a number of statements that by themselves threaten shareware authors' copyright and trademark rights: 1. Three times in the letter, Caudill claims that all of the programs in the PC-SIG library are in the public domain. Nowhere in the letter is there any acknowledgement that most of the programs' authors retain copyright ownership. This sort of claim, if repeated, has the effect of diluting Shareware authors' rights. [In an Oct. 13 letter to this author, Caudill said Fidonews Page 8 5 Jan 1987 this claim "was made in error" and that future letters would correct the wording, but did not address my request that he send a correction letter to earlier recipients.] 2. Three times in the letter, PC-SIG claims copyright ownership of all the disks in the library. The overbroad claim in the letter, however, seems to order the recipient to stop distributing the programs, not just the programs in the same order PC-SIG puts them. [Caudill's Oct. 13 letter to this author says that the intent is only to claim copyright on PC-SIG's directory disks, and that vendors receiving the letter would not be confused. I disagree.] 3. PC-SIG also claims, in the letter, that the recipient cannot use the same disk names and titles as PC-SIG, as the disk names are copyrights (trademarks?) of PC-SIG. [In the Oct. 13 letter, Caudill concedes that PC-SIG does not claim ownership rights to the titles, except when used in conjunction with PC-SIG's copyrighted numbering system.] 4. The letter also implies that the program authors somehow work for or with PC-SIG; this is unnerving not just because I allow many vendors, user groups and BBSs to distribute GAGS, but because it implies an affiliation that may lead buyers to assume that PC-SIG has paid the authors for the programs somehow, thus reducing the likelihood of anyone ever sending me money. (I've received many registrations, including some from people who bought GAGS from other vendors: no one has ever registered after buying GAGS from PC-SIG.) [Caudill's Oct. 13 letter says that the general tone of the vendor letters negate this effect, but he agreed to put a note in future letters saying that PC-SIG has no proprietary rights in the disks it sells.] 5. In the letter, PC-SIG also claims that it can collect the damages provided in the US Copyright Act, which implies that they have registered the disks. I was assured by PC- SIG owner Richard Peterson that the firm has not, in fact, registered the disks. (Of course, that means that the list of damages is simply a bluff that cannot be asked for.) [Mr. Caudill's Oct. 13 letter rebuts this, claiming that PC-SIG has, in fact, registered the disks.] Why is PC-SIG Doing This? ------------------------- Now, as I noted above, I can't object to PC-SIG's legitimate interest in protecting its name and its directory. However, when I read the letter and talked to other Shareware disk vendors, it wasn't clear whether PC-SIG's goal was to protect its rights or to drive its competitors out of business. PC-SIG is using the money it has made selling MY SOFTWARE to Fidonews Page 9 5 Jan 1987 drive other vendors out of business, thus limiting the overall potential of this distribution channel. These other vendors, in many cases, are individuals who can't afford to hire a lawyer. The most offensive fact is that PC-SIG's letter simply tramples on my legal rights. One vendor, who had obtained my permission to distribute GAGS, pulled it (and other programs) from his library after receiving PC-SIG's overbroad letter. It's back in the library, but both that vendor and I lost sales as a result of PC-SIG's excessive aggression. If other vendors pull my disk or go out of business because of PC-SIG's letter, I lose money so that PC-SIG can have a bigger share of a smaller marketplace. Of course, if this one letter were the only problem with PC- SIG, I'd not be so worked up. But GAGS originally made its way into the PC-SIG library before I gave permission. Luckily for them, I had decided to let them distribute it before I found out that it was in the library. I gave them permission, and notified them of each update. They never sent me anything. PC-SIG completely ignored my update notices, instead insisting four months later, when I called them, that I had to mail them the update free in order to get the new versions into the library. (What a great idea: their cost of goods is ZERO. They buy disks for 39 cents and sell them for $6 each, with no costs in between.) Other authors' programs have found their way into the PC-SIG library without permission, and in at least one case was sold despite a clear disclaimer in the program stating that for- profit vendors like PC-SIG could not distribute it. (This latter incident speaks well for PC-SIG's claim that it screens every program carefully.) PC-SIG's CD-ROM Disk: --------------------- A few weeks ago, I discovered that PC-SIG had included GAGS on its new CD-ROM disk it is selling, in direct violation of the permission letter I gave them. Again, it never occurred to them to even write me a letter asking for a change to my permission letter. [Caudill's Oct. 13 letter claims that PC-SIG's sale of the CD-ROM disk does not violate my license, which permits sales of any disk for which they charge $8 or less. His letter does not mention that the CD-ROM disk sells for $195, which my calculator program emphatically says is much more than $8.] Lip Service to Shareware authors: --------------------------------- Last month, at the PC-Faire in San Francisco, I picked up PC- SIG's catalog update/newsletter at their huge booth. In the Fidonews Page 10 5 Jan 1987 catalog comes yet another slap in the face. I expect companies like PC-SIG to make a good-faith effort to encourage buyers to pay for their disks. Instead, the firm's newsletter seems to suggest that Shareware authors make megabucks, and don't need Shareware contributions. A direct quote: "Q: Do the authors who ask for a donation or contribution really make money? A: The high end of scale for people using the Open Software concept to distribute their software is $1.5 million to $2.5 million a year. My estimate is that the average developer earns about $40,000 to $50,000 a year per program. Others make less than $500 a year." I must disagree, Mr. Peterson: the average Shareware author probably sits a lot closer to your $500 figure. The only folks I know who have such large grosses are folks like Bob Wallace and Jim Button, who also run expensive marketing campaigns. If the average author makes $40,000 per program, I'll eat a floppy disk. The effect of such a quote is to make buyers think there's no need to pay Shareware authors, since they already do so well. It looks to me as if most of the money being made in Shareware is going into PC-SIG's bank account. By itself, that's not too upsetting: I decided to distribute GAGS as Shareware, knowing that vendors like PC-SIG may make more money than I. But I never expected any company to start firing a gun at the authors who are necessary to its very existence. PC-SIG Conclusion: ------------------ In my first (September 19) letter to PC-SIG regarding these matters, I asked PC-SIG to send a retraction of its vendor to everyone who received it, and demanded that GAGS (my shareware program, the Generic Adventure Game System) be removed from the illegal CD-ROM version of the PC-SIG library. I also demanded payment for the copies illegally distributed. Mr. Caudill's October 13 reply conceded some points, and agreed to change future letters, but did not address my request for a correction letter. He also said that their CD-ROM distribution of GAGS is legal, but agreed to "pull" it from the next version of the disk. My October 15 reply to Mr. Caudill and Mr. Peterson did several things: it revokes PC-SIG's license to distribute GAGS, effective November 1, 1986; it requests again that a correction letter be sent; it demands that PC-SIG pay for illegally distributed copies of GAGS; and requests a written apology for the firm's improper conduct. Fidonews Page 11 5 Jan 1987 ============================= III. Pink Panther Data Systems Pink Panther Data Systems Richard E. Andrew P.O. Box 271098 Escondido, CA 92027-0732 Pink Panther is a tiny, nearly insignificant vendor, compared to PC-SIG. However, I recently discovered that they are even more discourteous. About two months ago, I noticed their booth at a computer swap meet here in Northern California. I looked in the catalog and noticed that GAGS was in their library; I knew they had not asked for permission, so I asked to speak to the person in charge. I informed Mr. Andrews that GAGS cannot be distributed by any for-profit vendor unless the vendor writes and requests my written permission. He agreed to pull the disk from the library, and to write and ask for my permission. Two weeks later, I again saw the company exhibiting at a show, and again discovered that they were selling GAGS. Mr. Andrews said that he'd been busy and thus unable to write a letter asking for permission, and that he'd put the disk back in the library by accident. I told him that I was quite displeased with his actions, and would send him a letter to that effect, but pointed out that if he wished to distribute GAGS, I would grant permission on receipt of a written request. I sent him my usual firm-but- polite letter asking that he either stop distributing my program or remove it from his library, and demanding a written reply within 20 days. He wrote back, saying that he had not actually sold any copies of GAGS, that he has removed it from the library, and that he thought I was being too protective of my program. He didn't ask for permission to distribute it. Why am I upset? --------------- Mr. Andrews' reply letter suggested that my actions in "fervently defending" my rights will reduce overall distribution of GAGS and hence my own income. I agree with the former but not the latter. By requiring that for-profit enterprises obtain my written permission before distributing GAGS, I can provide updates and information more efficiently, Fidonews Page 12 5 Jan 1987 rather than trusting to "word of mouth." I am also better able to check that such vendors are complying with the rules. Mr. Andrews' letter also suggested that I was "totally barring" distribution of GAGS by commercial libraries. He's wrong: any such enterprises that obtain written permission and agree to the terms in Appendix C of the GAGS manual may distribute GAGS. Many firms have done so, and I have never yet refused permission, though I might in some cases. The following is taken directly from my reply to Mr. Andrews: "One main point seems to have escaped many commercial vendors of 'user-supported' software. Such vendors are responsible, as is any publisher, for obtaining legal rights to distribute these programs. Getting such permission is a cost of doing business, and in fact is one of relatively few costs that exist in [that] particular business. "A few years ago, I worked for an academic book publisher. For each quote or excerpt by an author, we obtained written permission from the copyright owner. It took us hundreds of hours to do this for a typical book. Such permission was almost always free and gladly given. Had we not obtained permission, there would be no great financial loss to the original publisher or author. Indeed, the quote increases sales of the original work. But refusal to seek permission would be a breach of common courtesy. It is also illegal. "Refusal to seek the permission of shareware authors also shows a lack of common courtesy, and a lack of respect for the law." ================================= IV. Where To Go (for more discussion of shareware rights) The discussion of these issues has sparked several developments. RIGHTS Echomail --------------- First, a new FidoNet "Echomail" conference has been started to discuss the issues. The EchoMail area is called "RIGHTS" and is being coordinated by Steve Butler (138/3), Rob Barker (138/34 aka 17/0) and Tracy Graves (138/39), all of Tacoma, WA. It has already been picked up in the Austin, Texas area, and will probably be available soon on many more Fido BBSs around the country. (Echomail conferences periodically "echo" messages to each other, so each discussion has many more participants than a single BBS could support.) Fidonews Page 13 5 Jan 1987 The CompuServe issue was also widely discussed in the IFNA, and apparently the SYSOPS, Echomail conferences. According to a widely-distributed message, the RIGHTS echomail conference will discuss: "Who has what programs on the $ervices for which they were the authors? What steps WILL we take to protect our ability to distribute PD programs, Shareware, etc? What contacts do we have (collectively) in the Publishing Industry? What contacts do we have on state and federal legislatures? Who is willing to do some legwork to define exactly what our exposure is (legally) along the lines of routines from: CompuServe, PC Magazine, CL Publications, etc. "We don't want a bitch session. We want those who are willing to act based on a collective, well thought out plan of action. Plan the action for step #6. Freedom of authors to distribute their handiwork as they desire. Freedom of BBS systems to have available PD, Shareware, User supported, etc. programs for download in accordance with the authors wishes -- not somebody elses money scheme what protection do sysops need from users uploading known copyrighted (ie, not for distribution by BBS) software...." Probus International, Puyallup, WA (206) 848-9232 (138/3) Arctic Net, Steilacoom, WA (206) 581-7003 (138/34) Computer Coach, Tacoma, WA (206) 565-1476 (138/39) Other On-Line Discussions ------------------------- In addition to FidoNet, there have been some discussions on BIX (the Byte [magazine] Information Exchange), and of course on CompuServe. Both are fee-based information services, charging for connect time. For informaton on CompuServe, call the toll- free number mentioned in (I) above. To get onto BIX, see any recent issue of BYTE magazine or call (800) 277-BYTE or (603) 924-7681. FidoNews -------- I doubt I'll be only one to discuss this issue in FidoNews, which is the electronically-distributed newsletter for Fido BBS sysops. It's available from many Fido BBSs, and is edited by Thom Henderson (yes, the co-author of ARC and Seadog), who can be reached at Fido node 1/1 (somewhere in New Jersey). Another Fido newsletter is the Net 161 Nooseletter, coordinated by Butch Walker at Fido nodes 161/1 through 161/4. I'm sure there are other newsletters as well; if any contain discussions of these issues, I'd like to hear about them. IFNA ---- The International Fido New Association is a non-profit Fidonews Page 14 5 Jan 1987 organization of Fido Sysops. It will apparently soon become the distribution arm through which commercial copies of Fido can be purchased, and will also be doing work on behalf of Fido sysops, possibly including legal help. Ken Kaplan, Ben Baker, Thom Henderson, and Tom Jennings are probably the best people to get information from on IFNA. Of course, there's also an IFNA echomail conference on many Fido BBSs nationwide. Legal Help ---------- Shareware authors are well advised to investigate their legal rights before they begin distributing their programs, if they wish to retain copyright ownership. I've not read it, but several people have suggested the book "Legal Care for Your Software," which "goes into all sorts of detail for copyrights, selling of marketing rights, royalties, etc.," according to a public Fido message. I believe it's published by Nolo Press, 950 Parker St., Berkeley, CA 94710, (415) 549-1976. There are other books on that and related subjects from many publishers. Check any bookstore with a large computer book or legal book section. At one time, there was a "model" Shareware license agreement posted on CompuServe. I used it as a starting point for the license agreement used in GAGS (appendix C in the GAGS manual), but it was much different from what I ended up with. It may or may not help to talk to a lawyer, since the whole issue of legal protection for Shareware is still so uncertain. If you're writing a program that you think is worth a lot, you should probably talk to a lawyer. Keep in mind that lawyers are expensive. Publications ------------ Unfortunately, now that InfoWorld has completed the transition from general-interest computer newspaper to a newsweekly for "volume buyers of PCs," there aren't really any regular news sources for these types of issues. Of course, InfoWorld and many other magazines will continue to publish occasional articles on these issues. Another good source for this type of information are local user group newsletters. Groups like the Boston Computer Society, and the San Francisco PC Users Group provide excellent newsletters. If anyone knows of other publications that cover these issues regularly, please let me know. Me Fidonews Page 15 5 Jan 1987 -- I'll continue writing occasional articles about the progress of some of these issues, and will drop them into FidoNews and anywhere else I'm welcome. I'm always glad to talk about the issue, too. Mark J. Welch, Shareware author (The Generic Adventure Game System) P.O. Box 2409, San Francisco, CA 94126 Voice (415) 845-2430 [Berkeley] Fido 161/459 [private, Seadog] BIX 'mwelch' [About the author: Mark J. Welch is now a freelance writer and full-time law student. He was formerly a reporter for InfoWorld and earlier was associate news editor for BYTE.] ----------------------------------------------------------------- Fidonews Page 16 5 Jan 1987 ================================================================= NOTICES ================================================================= The Interrupt Stack 17 Jan 1987 Deadline for voting on the proposed bylaws. Your ballot MUST be received by this date! 17 May 1987 Metro-Fire Fido's Second Birthday BlowOut and Floppy Disk Throwing Tournament! All Fido Sysops and Families Invited! Contact Christopher Baker at 135/14 for more information. 24 Aug 1989 Voyager 2 passes Neptune. If you have something which you would like to see on this calendar, please send a message to FidoNet node 1/1. ----------------------------------------------------------------- RADIO COMPUTING DIGEST Devoted to Low-Cost, License-Free, Wireless Computer Communications. Public Digital Radio Service (PDRS) coverage, and much more. PDRS baud rate, in excess of One Million bps. Radio Computing Digest (RCD) will show you how to set up Digital Radio Stations, BBS's and LAN's. Both local and long distance links possible. Connect your computer to others, without Ma Bell! For a copy of RCD's Premier Issue, send Three Dollars to: P. L. Christensen, Box 916, Oroville, WA. 98844 ----------------------------------------------------------------- WEIRDBASE IS BACK ON-LINE! Yes, Fido 100/523, WeirdBase, the coordinator of the Magick and SF Echomail conferences, is back up and on-line. I apologize to the entire world for the crash; it was mostly my fault (but be VERY careful using RENUM on a hard disk that is nearly full). If you sent me, or anyone at 100/523, FidoNet mail during the week prior to December 13th, it was probably lost un-read. Please re- send it. Thank you! - Brad Hicks, Founding Sysop WeirdBase, Fido 100/523 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Fidonews Page 17 5 Jan 1987 *Official IFNA By-laws Ballot Official IFNA Articles of Association and By-laws Ballot We, the interim directors of IFNA, submit for ratification the Articles of Association and By-laws as published in FidoNews number 349. In accordance with the recommendation of the By-laws Committee, each person listed as the Sysop of one or more FidoNet nodes, as of NODELIST.311 dated November 7, 1986, is entitled to ONE vote. The proposed IFNA Articles of Association and By-laws, as published in Fido349.NWS dated December 22, 1986, should be: (Check one line) Adopted ________ Rejected ________ I am the SYSOP of record a FidoNet node which was listed in NODELIST.311 dated November 7, 1986 and have the right to cast one vote. There will be ONLY be one vote per person. There will be ONLY one vote per net/node number. I understand these rules and cast my ballot in accordance with them. _______________________ ___________ Signature Date _____/______ Net Node Return this ballot via U. S. Mail to arrive not later than January 17, 1987 at: IFNA Ratification C/O Christopher L. Bonfanti, CPA Aselage, Kiefer & Co. 701 Emerson Road, Suite 201 Creve Coeur Corporate Center St Louis, Mo. 63141-6709 Aselage, Kiefer & Co. are Certified Public Accountants and will provide an independent count of the vote and publish the results in FidoNews. Votes received by Saturday, January 17th will be included in the results. -----------------------------------------------------------------