Winship <[log in to unmask]> says:
 
>I knew this would happen eventually, but, still, BOO, HISS!
>
>And a question: is this person who wants to charge for subscribing to the
>list going to pay royalties to those who answer questions about list
>management on this and other lists, for which there is no direct charge?
>If not, why not?  Maybe I and others will stop answering questions unless
>we get our cut.
 
Well, I suppose it depends on the purpose of the list.  If it is
something for which people generally manage lists for the passion
or shared interest of the group, and which traditionally has been
provided for free as a "labour of love," then perhaps I would disapprove.
But perhaps the fee covers some of the real cost of running the
list--it's getting harder and harder to find system administrators
willing to host lists for free.  Even world.std.com, which is perhaps
more closely tied to the roots of the Internet culture than many other
commercial providers, recently announced that they would charge a fee
(monthly+number of subscribers+message volume (possibly)).
 
I wouldn't dream of charging for the lists I manage, but I don't think
it is _automatically_ a bad thing.  (However, I don't envy the person the
administrative burden of collecting the money--he couldn't charge very
much, owing to competition from those who are willing to do this sort of
thing for free, and I can't imagine this possibly being
cost/time-effective till e-money becomes a reality and in widespread
use.)
 
As far as the "free advice" they get on this and other lists and other
Internet resources in general:  LOTS of professionals, service
providers, marketing agents, scums, etc., in all fields get
free information from the Internet, as they do from free libraries, etc.
And lots of people profit from the information--many profit even from
the _existence_ of the information, and the need to disseminate it, etc.
 
If I don't want someone to profit from _direct_ use of information I
provide on the Internet without my getting cut, I'll put an explicit
copyright statement on it and charge royalties; otherwise, I presumably
have no objection to its reasonably use (yes, yes, we've had the
discussion on implicit copyrights! :-)).  But there is no way to know
how someone uses _general knowledge_ gained from the contributions of a
number of people--it is not reasonable to expect that it will be used only
in ways that do not, directly or indirectly, put money into anybody's
pockets.
 
Shahrukh Merchant