Kahle v. AshcroftDAW (Direct Access Windows)
originally submitted by David Brennan:
Menuing program no longer sold; present copyright holder refused to grant additional licences.
Stifled uses
David Brennan:
This program was designed to provide a shell menu that replaced the Windows program manager (3.x - 9.x); we used this in a library environment and it was very useful. Some years later, we added additional computers and wanted to use this program on them as well. By that point, the owner of the program was Symantec (forget the original producer, but it isn't relevant to the problem) Symantec no longer sold the program, and refused to grant additional licenses *even though* I was willing to sign a release that I did not need either new media *or* support of any kind.
We spent a great deal of time researching solutions before we found another product that met our needs.
I found the whole situation beyond ridiculous, since Symantec would essentially be getting cash for a product without having to provide either physical media or any support for it. Would have thought it was a no-brainer. Instead, they lost business to a competitor.
If a company is merely holding copyright to something and refusing to allow continued use, then the copyright should lapse.
Hoarding intellectual property certainly goes against the spirit of copyright.