Copyright (C) 1996 by John Murray

Limiting Use of Software -- How Far Should One Go?
==================================================

Over the years, the computer industry has developed the concept of
Shareware, especially for Personal Computers.  Shareware resulted from
software developers finding solutions to a couple of problems in the
industry.  One was the the problem that if you are not sure you want
to use a particular package, you still have to go ahead and purchase
the software in order to put it on your machine, and then there is no
way to prove that it has been removed if you want to take it back. 
(Most computer store will not accept opened software for return).  

Another problem that shareware gets rid of is retail sales mark-ups.
This problem is obviated since the buyer ends up sending payment
directly to the author.  

The concept of shareware is simple:  You are free to distribute copies
of the program to anyone you want, as long as you distribute the
ENTIRE package (ie. all of the programs, online documentation, order
blanks, etc).  The software developer sets a cost for the package, and
if you use it for longer than a "reasonable" length of time (i.e., the
amount of time needed to try it out and tell if you want to keep using
it or not) you are expected to send the author the payment requested.
If you do not wish to keep it, you are to remove it from your computer
system.  

One problem with this simple concept, though, is that the author has
no way of enforcing this payment policy.  It is only the honesty of
the user which allows the author to make any money from his or her
software.  

A firm that we will call MeeShack Software decided, however, to go one
step further. They decided to ensure that people who tried out their
software did indeed pay for it after using it for demonstration and
evaluation.  They did this by including a "bomb" in the program which,
after a period of 45 days from the time it was installed, or 100 uses,
whichever came first, erased itself if the user did not install the
"key" which you received back when you sent payment for the software.  

In actual use, however, it was discovered that in addition to removing
the shareware program, the "bomb" would also either erase or garble
other data on the user's computer so that the user lost information
that was totally unrelated to the software from MeeShack.  

Questions:
==========

1. Do you think that MeeShack should be allowed to give out programs 
which erase themselves after a trial period?

2. One of the major problems with this software is that the triggering
of the bomb also destroys other user data.  Should MeeShack Software
be held responsible in any way for losses from this particular
"feature?"  Often, the software license information says that the
vendor (seller) is not held liable for damages done by his or her
software.  But because this is a trial use, no such agreement has been
made.  Does this make any difference in your answer?  

3. Assume that MeeShack Software did not intend to erase more than
just their own software, but that a bug (i.e., an unforseen mistake)
in the code used to erase the software caused the damage to the other
data.  Does this change your answer to #2?  Why or why not?  

4. One of the computers that this software was tested on was a
computer used by the state for criminal records and warrants.  Because
of the garbled data, several people were denied driver's license
renewals because "the computer said they had a record" when they
didn't.  Does this change your answer?  

5. Another computer that this software was tested on was used by a
hospital emergency room to maintain their poison antidote database. 
Garbled data had the potential to have people use incorrect
information in treating poison cases that came into the emergency
room.  Does this change your answer?  What if someone actually dies
because of the garbled information?  Does this change anything? 
Why/Why not?