On Mon, Dec 12, 2005 at 07:53:24PM +1300, David Mann wrote: > On Dec 12, 2005, at 1:43 AM, Bob Shell wrote: > > >I'm not sure I understand that distinction. I live in a college > >town and all of the professors I know get their software at the > >academic price. Many of them then write books with Microsoft Word > >and get paid for doing so. I'm sure Microsoft knows about this. > >That certainly seems to be commercial use. > > I know the profs are entitled to buy the academic version, but I > don't know if there are actual usage restrictions (there probably > are, but I doubt MS is stupid enough to start pulling RIAA tactics). > > BTW I hope those profs keep good backups! > > - Dave
It's arguable that a professor writing a book is to be expected; I suspect that could well be within the academic use restrictions. But if I enrolled in the local photographic class and used that to pick up a copy of Photoshop I'd be on very shaky ground if I were to use that to edit photographs for anything other than my own personal use. Furthermore, it's not really an issue about what MS or Adobe do or do not choose to enforce. I make my living writing software, so I try to be self-policing about violating intellectual property agreements. If I don't like the agreement, then I don't use the software (just like I won't put my photographs up on any website where I don't like the conditions - meetup.com, to name but one).
