On Thu, 26 May 1994 16:03:23 -0400 Jim Conklin said for Ken King on LSVSRV-L:
>        One of the goals of the CREN software acquisition effort is to
>protect its members from the rampant greed of monopolists.  For those
>considering doing business with a company that operates in the style of
>L-Soft, the following advice may be helpful.
>... more "stuff" deleted...
 
   I guess in classic Internet tradition I should say "FLAME ON" here...
 
   As many others have expressed, I am VERY disappointed in this post
to LSTSRV-L - a list focused on the L-Soft LISTSERV product.  I had
this fleeting hope that it was a hoax.  I read LSTSRV-L as a digest so
my reply may duplicate or contradict what others have said.  (I've
included the original note at the end).
 
   We seem to have a classic example of a service organization like
EDUCOM taking on a contract and "growing" itself, increasing income
and staff salaries, making self-preservation and THEIR priorities the
top priorities and maybe becoming too dependent on the contract
income.  I wonder if EDUCOM and CREN as membership organizations can
step back and see what is going on here?  I have a feeling that Ken
King and the staff may think they ARE CREN.  So why do we elect a
board?  EDUCOM is not doing a service to the educational community
by participating in this sort of activity.
 
   I have wondered why I get so upset with what CREN says.  I think this
is the key part - they build on the work of others as if they were the
key movers and shakers rather than opportunists!  (So now we have
opportunists protecting us from monopolists?  Right).
 
   They talk a good talk but for years while Eric and others were
donating the software, resources, and support for LISTSERV CREN was
collecting their "fees" for what - generating routing tables,
brochures, and articles?  It doesn't take three or more layers of
management to do that.  Talk about rampant greed.
 
   I hope the CREN board can take quick action to correct this mess.
I think the mail item exposes once and for all why Ken King and EDUCOM
have to go if CREN is to retain even a trace of respectability.  But
then to most of the recipients of this it won't even matter.  They
have made up their mind (or been pushed by this) to get out now.
 
   I have always thought there was a future for an association of
academic network users whether or not this was based on a particular
topology or physical network.  I think some of the board ideas such as
sharing Internet access among institutions make sense.  But when they
get into software sales things start to get very sticky indeed.  It is
probably just not an appropriate way for an association like this to
put it self in a competetive position with other vendors (let alone
vendors whom it has signed contracts with).
 
   I hope CREN can get out of its contract with EDUCOM.  But I haven't
looked at the by-laws to see what is required.  But maybe the problem
is the board itself.  I certainly don't know the internal workings of
CREN.  In that case it is going to take a lot of work on the part of
the members (if there are any left after a year) to fix things.  Maybe
it isn't worth it and a new organization should be formed by those in
higher education.
 
   If the board needs legal advice I know the names of a couple
lawyers that are familiar with the net...  but I guess they specialize
in immigration...  ;-)
 
         Marty Hoag
 
Disclaimer:  Needless to say these are all my opinions.  I doubt that
             anyone else would want them!
 
Here is the original note from LSTSRV-L
 
Date:    Thu, 26 May 1994 16:03:23 -0400
From:    Jim Conklin for Ken King <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: A Better Deal
 
        One of the goals of the CREN software acquisition effort is to
protect its members from the rampant greed of monopolists.  For those
considering doing business with a company that operates in the style of
L-Soft, the following advice may be helpful.
 
 
1.      Look at Schedule "C" of the CREN/L-Soft Agreement.  That schedule
states the prices L-Soft was proposing to charge CREN members before the
Listproc acquisition was announced.  At that point in time, the CREN
transition plan from NJE to IP was presumably hostage to an IP version of
LISTSERV.
 
2.      Be wary of prices to be set later when they have "more experience".
 For example, if a maintenance price is to be set later, and you're
committed at that time, you may be subject to the rules described in item
number 1.
 
3.      Get a complete definition of what a perpetual license means that
distinguishes between a new release and a new product.  For example,
remember LISTSERV VM-TCP/IP is a new product requiring a new license, not
an upgrade from LISTSERV VM-NJE.
 
4.      Remember that dropping CREN membership will result in your removal
from the BITNET routing tables.
 
5.      In the next few weeks there may be some CREN announcements that
will help you get an even better deal.  Watch BITNEWS.
 
 
Kenneth M. King
  Executive Director, CREN