[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: IBM CPL v1

Ben Finney <bignose+hates-spam@benfinney.id.au>
> MJ Ray <mjr@phonecoop.coop> writes:
> > Ben Finney <bignose+hates-spam@benfinney.id.au>
> > > I concur that it's not a fee[0].
> > > [0] I do feel that an individual's private information is effectively
> > > a valuable property that can be traded at the individual's discretion
> > > in pieces for other things of value.
> > 
> > How do you conclude that having to give valuable property to the
> > licensor is not a fee?
> I don't think "fee" should be defined so broadly as to include
> "obligation to surrender something that could theoretically have a
> monetary value to someone".

It's not theoretical that personal details have value - I'm frequently
called at work by companies offering to sell me various types of it.
Also, the earlier post called it a valuable property.  Surely some

This is only discussing what a fee isn't: is it possible to agree as
unacceptable anything beisdes the obvious pay-me-X fee demand?
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct

Reply to: