Subscription/Service Fees - Netscape

David Davies ddavies at
Wed Mar 28 02:51:47 UTC 2001

On Wednesday, 28 March 2001 7:25 AM, Karsten M. Self wrote:

-> > > > Netscape was able to actively sell into those 
-> corporations in a very
-> > > > interesting manner.  "Since you already have our 
-> products and the
-> > > > license says you are required to pay we suggest you pay us."
-> > > 
-> > > Support this statement with a citation and/or reference.
-> > 
-> > Do you not believe that?  I also thought that that was 
-> what they did.
-> The statement is strongly worded, isn't supported by 
-> reference, and is
-> ambiguously stated.  Does the statement mean that these companies are
-> obligated to pay for use of Mozilla because of their prior 
-> licensing of
-> Netscape versions <= 4.x?  Does it refer to Netscape server-side
-> products?  Does it refer to contractual obligations to pay 
-> for software
-> through some specified time period?

Sorry for being unspecific but I did say in the paragraph immediately prior 
"This is much like what Netscape did originally."
Originally (at the beginning) implies the practice is not continued to this

Regarding the statement it was not meant to be an exact quote.  I was
consulting on intranet projects at a number of larger corporations during
'97 and '98 and saw first hand Netscape's approach to sales.
I meant to express only the tone of the approach Netscape took in sales to
these companies.

To clarify.  

The example refers to Netscape sales activity during '97 and '98 and perhaps
a little on either side.  
It is my experience only but I assume other people will be able to verify
whether it was a prevailing practice or not.

It only applies to people who used versions <= 4.x of Navigator and only to
the registration fee.

More information about the License-discuss mailing list