Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > 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 contradiction? 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? -- MJR/slef My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/ Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]