10-06-2008 01:58 AM
I'm not very amused by the new covenants to download style files. I realize that a recent lawsuit against a competitor may have spooked people, but I don't understand several issues:
Can these files be used by users of the EndNote trial as part of their evaluation process? The first term of the contract seems like it may prohibit that.
Why is the user manual not made available to everyone? It can be useful prior to the purchase of EndNote for informational evaluation. I do not see what value it has to your competitors, and I see only advantages for EndNote in increasing the distribution of the manual.
Why is the word "modify" in covenant 2? You do not ship every output styles, connection files, import filters, or template for all needs. Fortunately, EndNote has excellent editors to fill in these gaps. Can I no longer modify the components of EndNote for use form within EndNote, even though I have a license? If so, this seems to be a major loss of value!
10-06-2008 02:22 AM - edited 10-06-2008 02:23 AM
10-06-2008 05:02 PM
I've thought about this a bit more. While I see the business concerns of having third paries redistribute EndNote data (for possible use in third party products), I don't see the business concern over limiting what licensed EndNote owners can do with the data (including using this data, themselves, in third-party software). People might prefer aspects of other software over aspects of EndNote, but might still be willing to purchase EndNote so that they can use the pieces of EndNote they like (including the data) as part of their workflow that may include third-party software.
If they prefer the word processor integration (such as direct integration with OpenOffice.org Writer) of a third party software, but need citation styles that are absent from that product, they are now out of luck. If the EULA was more permissive, they'd purchase EndNote for the styles & get to use their preferred software. This seems to be win-win
Instead, the new contract terms seem to assume "if you're not with us, you're against us" & I don't know if this fits with academic research.
I hope that these terms will be reconsidered!
10-06-2008 05:29 PM
I really don't trust lawyers, and lawyers wrote those licensing words. I am hoping that someone from Thomas is going to translate it into sensible, reasonable words.
So my recently sharing a modified style via these forums would be out of step with the current "contract"? Oh, pleeease.
and I can't modify a style for a different journal.....?
Say it ain't so, Joe!
10-09-2008 09:02 AM
As far as i understand part 2 (Restrictions) it is still allowed for licensed users to edit and exchange (with other licensed users) by giving us the possibility in the programe.
I meen, whats the use of editing, given by EndNote, if it is not allowed? Than they should delete that option and the import/export function (e.g. of the reference types that they have implemented not that far ago).
Or maybe that will come with X2.01?
I hope not.
10-09-2008 10:23 AM
I would not consider the existence of a feature that enables something to be sufficient "prior written consent."
The editing features in EndNote would still allow you to create items from scratch or to modify items that you created. (I certainly hope that I own all rights to things I create!) This doesn't mean that you have legal permission to edit the styles, formats, connections, and templates that you did not create from scratch!
10-21-2008 12:46 PM
10-21-2008 01:32 PM
Thanks, Jason. I was a bit miffed that your initial post was deleted & that my posts that quoted yours were also deleted without comment, but perhaps I should have been more patient. The revisions in this post (to clarify that we are allowed to share and modify .ens, .enl, .enlx, and .enf files (rather than the vague "EndNote files")) seem to be perfectly reasonable.
What are our responsibilities, as customers, to ensure that styles we share are only used by other licensed EndNote users in conjunction with EndNote? It would seem to me that the files that are currently available publicly rarely (if ever) have click-through agreements & it is non-obvious how a downloader would realize that they would need to be a licensed EndNote user and to use the files only with EndNote.
I would also like to see my other questions addressed--redistribution of the manual & style files to EndNote Trial users would be useful to me if working with co-authors who are not yet licensed users of EndNote and would probably improve the trial process in general.
Given EndNote's continued lack of support for some word processors (e.g. OO.o) and some platforms (e.g. native Linux), it is quite sad to see that I am not explicitly able to use styles that I have purchased with third-party software for use on those platforms. I still use EndNote+MS Word on Windows for much of my editing, but I must say that many of my coauthors do not & I do use Linux for many tasks and may consider the switch to an OO.o on Linux, myself. Ideally, an EndNote license would allow you to use these files as you see fit. I may even be willing to pay a premium for the explicit ability to do so, even though I have already paid for the software, itself.