From owner-freebsd-isp  Thu Oct 24 06:21:05 1996
Return-Path: owner-isp
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id GAA20496
          for isp-outgoing; Thu, 24 Oct 1996 06:21:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.id.net (mail.id.net [199.125.1.6])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id GAA20489
          for <freebsd-isp@FREEBSD.ORG>; Thu, 24 Oct 1996 06:21:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from server.id.net (rls@server.id.net [199.125.1.10]) by mail.id.net (8.7.5/ID-Net) with ESMTP id JAA17059; Thu, 24 Oct 1996 09:22:53 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from rls@localhost) by server.id.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) id JAA17637; Thu, 24 Oct 1996 09:21:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: Robert Shady <rls@mail.id.net>
Message-Id: <199610241321.JAA17637@server.id.net>
Subject: Re: nntpcache
In-Reply-To: <199610232158.QAA00885@vic.cioe.com> from Steve Ames at "Oct 23, 96 04:58:46 pm"
To: steve@cioe.com (Steve Ames)
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 09:21:05 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: freebsd-isp@FREEBSD.ORG
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL25 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-isp@FREEBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> Warning! Be careful about setting up nntpcache testing. I set up a
> couple of servers to run nntpcache to see if it would recurve the news
> traffic in a way that I could present to the all powerful accounting
> department to get money... a little ways into my test I got an email
> from the nntpcache people saying:
> 
> It has come to our attention that you are running an unlicensed nntpcache
> server. If we get your check within 7 days we will not pursue this matter.
> 
> OUCH! So not only do I not complete my tests (actually nntpcache seems
> to lock up frequently on my server, requiring a shutdown/restart to make
> it function again), but now I'm going to be 'pursued' for running it?
> 
> Sheesh! Even M$ lets people test run a good portion of its products.
> 
> Just a note! Be Wary. Also, the licensing requirements should probably
> be made more plain in the /usr/ports directory. *shrug* (and the 
> licensing requirements are harsh)

I'd be willing to bet that with the proper attorney, you could also have
a counter-suit against them for 'Knowingly & Willingly wasting your 
corporate resources costing you bandwidth & money without your permission
and against your will'...

I think it's very wrong for software to assume that if you have an Internet
connection that it's okay to waste my resources sending the authors an
e-mail message... What is this world coming to?

	-- Rob
===
      _/_/_/_/_/  _/_/_/_/               _/_/    _/  _/_/_/_/_/  _/_/_/_/_/
         _/      _/      _/    _/_/_/   _/  _/  _/  _/_/_/_/        _/
   _/_/_/_/_/  _/_/_/_/               _/      _/  _/_/_/_/_/      _/

                             Innovative Data Services 
                          Serving South-Eastern Michigan 
        Internet Service Provider / Hardware Sales / Consulting Services
       Voice: (810)855-0404 / Fax: (810)855-3268 / Web: http://www.id.net