Letters to the editor: on selecting the sites for IFIP congresses

concerning proprietary software packages. I agree with Fincrman's basic comment that the original letter raises two questions : (1) the free and open exchange of software packages; and (2) the availability of software descriptions referenced in professional publications. The Sun Oil Company has sold, bought, and traded such packages and has received and given some away free. A software package created by Sun Oil Company employees as part of their assigned duties represents a Sun Oil Company asset just as much as does an invention, or a design, or a trade secret, or any form of proprietary information. The decision as to whether to use this package only within Sun, or offer it for sale, or give it away to the public is a management decision that must be made in line with the company's responsibilities to its employees, stockholders, customers, and the public. It is the kind of decision that our company management makes frequently in the case of other proprietary information and the same criteria are applied. In broad terms, the proprietary information that we think might harm our competitive position if released is kept within the company • The proprietary information that we think would yield more in sale revenue than the harm we would suffer because of its use by others we offer for sale with appropriate secrecy agreements. The proprietary information whose wide use would be in the best interest of the public at large, we release for public use. We treat our proprietary software packages in this way, and we would expect other private, profit-oriented organizations to do the same. We consider proprietary software packages to be articles of commerce just as any other invention, design, piece of proprietary information, or manufactured item is. We find that software packages can be evaluated prior to sale, and we do this as a matter of course. We find that where the construction of the package is important to our use, we can arrange to examine this if we agree to suitable restrictions as to disclosure. We consider this to be hardly any different from our requirement that we evMuate the performance and general design of any machine or computer that we plan to rent or buy. With regard to the second point, the availability of software descriptions referenced in professional publications, I find myself in both agreement and limited disagreement with Finerman. I agree that a …