>>I was not aware I was not supposed to be able to do a search as a non PUTM. Is that a tripple negative or what? :)
>
>Well, here's more info but first some examples.
>
>1. You go at Amazon site to purchase a book. You are aware you have to purchase the book in order to get it. Then, you suddently realize that you could hack a URL in some kind of way or benefit of a lucky lack of security in the system and you download the book (assuming you wanted to purchase an e-version).
>
>2. You go at a convenience store. You are aware that all items have to be purchased, if you want some of them. But, by coincidence someone accidently left the back door of the store open, so you use it, grab something and leave from the same door without paying.
>
>3. You download an eval version of a software. The license says eval is good for 30 days. But, after 30 days, you discover that you can still use it but the license said that after 30 days you either have to uninstall or purchase a license.
>
>As for us, the PUTM search ability has always been announced as a PUTM benefit. This has been the case since the site turned commercial. As I mentioned in the other message, I'd have to do a small search to be sure if it was on Sep 96 or Sep 97. When doing a search, a non PUTM also always get a notice that the search is a PUTM benefit and the member has the flexibility to decide or not to upgrade.
>
>At first, there used to be the date. As you stated, some found this trick by the use of calendar and succeeded to find the related message. Of course, they had to go throught a bunch of messages but they were able to find it. But, then the date was removed but some users continued to use a more sophisticated approach by looking inside the URL to hack a hidden message # and so on. Basically, whatever is not offered as part of the interface would consider something not supported by the entity who owns the service and the same could apply if someone would hack a URL directly and gain access to something. Despite the fact that some would say that this could be a lack of security, the base is that it's not something offered from the interface - the same it goes with the 3 examples I stated.
>
>A more precised Terms & Conditions of the site and other legal aspects will be released shortly to take care of that and other situations. On all the logs I have here, you would be surprise to see how many users are attempting to gain access to things they are not allowed to by hacking a URL, trying a bunch of non developped URL module and so on.
>
>The use of a visible date in the original version was something that we can't do that much. That happened and visually it was shown. But, when other individuals persisted to hack inside the HTML and made URL attempts to gain access to messages from there, this is another story.

Michel,

I have always taken offense at your view that anyone who used the "date" way of searching was doing a "trick." Did you ever stop to consider that it was an honest mistake and we did not know any better? Thought not.

Renoir