jeffj@pro-avalon.cts.COM (Jeff Jungblut) (03/22/88)
In my experience with piracy, it is most rampant in your local high-school computer labs. When I was in HS, I could walk into one of the labs on any given day and see half of the machines running pirated games, 1/4 of the machines running Super Copy 3.6 or Copy II Plus to copy these games, and maybe one or two machines actually being used for school work. This is the most blatant form of piracy I've seen, though it's just as possible that the housewives in the ROP Word Processing lab are taking home copies of WordStar, AppleWorks, 1-2-3, etcetera.
lbotez@pro-sol.cts.com (Lynda Botez) (05/31/89)
Yo Ho Ho... Actually, the problem with piracy, is that it's more than just stealing... it's a hobby for many. I suppose you could consider a pirate a software collector. Most pirates spend five or ten minutes examining a new product (which, I suppose, they could do just as easily by heading down to the local Egghead store); then stuffing it into a plastic case with various other "collection" pieces. One must consider that most pirated software comes without documentation of any kind; and a real "pirate" enjoys the challenge figuring out how to use the product without any instructions. Only a few pirates actually crack the stuff. The software companies instigate this themselves... but copy-protecting software, they put out a "challenge" for their product to be "cracked". As long as there is copy-protection, there will be software pirates. It's like putting a sign on the software that says: "I dare you to de-protect me!" Hackers have been around as long as there have been computers. Many people actually find cracking software the "ultimate challenge". Whatever turns you on... :-) I suppose some of you may laugh.. but there are a few people out there in modem-land who actually download stuff just to preview it... then buy it if they think it's "worthy". As stated previously, a large percentage of programs are total trash.
dlyons@Apple.COM (David Lyons) (06/01/89)
In article <8905310736.AA18916@crash.cts.com> pnet01!pro-sol!lbotez@nosc.mil writes: >Yo Ho Ho... [...] >[...] The software companies instigate >this themselves... but copy-protecting software, they put out a "challenge" >for their product to be "cracked". As long as there is copy-protection, there >will be software pirates. It's like putting a sign on the software that says: > "I dare you to de-protect me!" Hackers have been around as long as there >have been computers. Many people actually find cracking software the >"ultimate challenge". Whatever turns you on... :-) > >I suppose some of you may laugh.. but there are a few people out there in >modem-land who actually download stuff just to preview it... then buy it if >they think it's "worthy". As stated previously, a large percentage of >programs are total trash. The jewelry companies instigate this themselves...by locking their jewelry inside glass cases, they put out a "challenge" for their product to be stolen. As long as there are glass cases, there will be jewel theives. It's like putting a sign on the jewelry that says: "I dare you to steal me!" Jewel theives have been around as long as there have been jewels. Many people actually find stealing jewelry the "ultimate challenge." Whatever turns you on.... :-) I suppose some of you may laugh. But there are a few people out there who actually steal stuff just to try it out--then they buy it if they think it's "worthy." As not stated previously, a large percentage of jewelry is total trash. --Dave Lyons, Apple Computer, Inc. | DAL Systems AppleLink--Apple Edition: DAVE.LYONS | P.O. Box 875 AppleLink--Personal Edition: Dave Lyons | Cupertino, CA 95015-0875 GEnie: D.LYONS2 or DAVE.LYONS CompuServe: 72177,3233 Internet/BITNET: dlyons@apple.com UUCP: ...!ames!apple!dlyons My opinions are my own, not Apple's.
dlyons@Apple.COM (David Lyons) (06/05/89)
In article <8906032136.AA07484@crash.cts.com> pnet01!pro-sol!lbotez@nosc.mil writes: >Network Comment: to #7830 by pnet01!crash!apple.com!dlyons >Nice try, Dave. Thank you. > Actually your analogy does have a point... but let's compare >Apples (heh..) to Apples, and not apples to oranges. Let's compare criminal acts to criminal acts, not fruit to fruit. :-) > First of all, jewelry is >something tangible... But not as useful as software, or as hard to debug. > you can't download a $50,000 bracelet... and all of a >sudden there are two of them. Also, I doubt you'll find too many "thieves" >that steal jewelry for sport. Are you a Pink Panther fan, by any chance? > To be fair, you should compare software >pirating to something like video pirating; which is much more similar. Comparing such similar things would be boring. My analogy works well enough for my purposes. Nobody has the legal right to selectively break laws. If you don't agree that copyrights are legitimately useful things that should be obeyed, work to get laws changed. >Now tell me, Dave... can you actually DENY never having had a piece of >pirated software in your possession? This isn't terribly relavent to the discussion, but I have never claimed sainthood. I have a good but not perfect history. I don't think it's okay to violate copyrights. And I hardly ever misspell "copyright" as "copywrite." >One thing that's interesting is that often the latest versions of software >show up on the pirate boards months before you can actually purchase it. I'm >still waiting for "Hyperstudio" (which I ordered from Tech Alliance a while >back); it's been out for over a month through the illegal channels... That's interesting. Roger had stacks and stacks of them at AppleFest Boston. It sold pretty well. If you got your copy illegally, it is probably considerably buggier than the current version. >Lynda --Dave Lyons, Apple Computer, Inc. | DAL Systems AppleLink--Apple Edition: DAVE.LYONS | P.O. Box 875 AppleLink--Personal Edition: Dave Lyons | Cupertino, CA 95015-0875 GEnie: D.LYONS2 or DAVE.LYONS CompuServe: 72177,3233 Internet/BITNET: dlyons@apple.com UUCP: ...!ames!apple!dlyons My opinions are my own, not Apple's.
christer@ikaros.cs.umu.se (Christer Ericson) (06/06/89)
Just wanted to pass these words, on the topic of copy protection, from one of my favourite gurus on to you netters (as an extension of the discussion of software piracy): Excerpt from Krakowicz's Kracking Korner Basics of Kracking 105: --- Our quotation of the week (month?) is from Don Lancaster, in the introduction to his book "Enhancing your Apple II, vol. 1" (a semi-good but seriously "stretched" compilation of little hardware tricks to make your Apple do new things): "Any attempt at copy protection will hack off and inconvenience your legitimate users, and it will dramatically increase the number of bootleg copies in circulation... The big thing about copy protection is that it doesn't. A year's effort by a crackerjack military cryptograpy team can usually be undone in fifteen minutes, between klingon zappings, by your average fourteen-year-old. and, morality and economics aside, one fact stands out... Undoing copy protection is fun! Not only is it fun, but cracking the uncopyable is about the most challenging and rewarding thing that you can possibly do with your Apple. And, the things you learn along the way are exactly the skills that you will need to become a really great programmer. So, I guess we should all be thankful for the copy-protection people since they are are giving us all this fascinating entertainment and superb training at an unbeatable price." Beautifully put, Don; an excellent rendition of the "krackist's manifesto". --- I wholehartedly agree with Don and Krakowicz. For those of you who haven't heard of Krakowicz's Kracking Korner (hereafter refered as to KKK [and DON'T misinterpret that, please]), KKK was a series of textfiles circulating on the underground cracking tutorial disks (these files originated from some BBS in the NY area [Pirate Trek?]) and covered absolutely everything a freshman to the trade wanted to know. I recommend these files to anyone interested in the working of the Disk II, they're far better than anything Apple ever has published on the topic (have they?). /Christer | Christer Ericson Internet: christer@cs.umu.se | | Department of Computer Science, University of Umea, S-90187 UMEA, Sweden | | >>>>> "I bully sheep. I claim God doesn't exist..." <<<<< |
lbotez@pro-simasd.cts.com (Lynda Botez) (06/06/89)
It's pretty slow around here (and elsewhere)... so why not continue this slightly dull and oft repeated debate on piracy? >Let's compare criminal acts to criminal acts, not fruit to fruit. -:) Okay. How about Apples to Nexts? -:) Nah... let's be boring... The film makers instigate this themselves... by allowing their programs to be shown on every tom, dick and harry television and cable channel. They invite themselves to be copied. As long as there is some signal being emitted over the airwaves (or cable)... there will be people copying programs [and, BTW, these programs cost a hell of a lot more to produce than any software]. Video piracy has been around as long as there have been VCRs. And I doubt there are very few people out there on this network that consider VCR taping a CRIME! Okay, all you video thieves, did you know that YOU are a criminal?). >[Jewelry] ... but not as useful as software, or as hard to debug. Well, I can't argue with you there... but there are those who would disagree. >Are you a Pink Panther fan, by any chance? Nope... the only thing I know about him is his theme song and his appearances in all those Inspector Clousseau film credits... Was he a kleptomaniac? >This isn't terribly relavent to the discussion, but I have never claimed >sainthood. I have a good but not perfect history. I don't think it's okay >to violate copyrights. And I hardly ever misspell "copyright" as >"copywrite". Whoa! Dave Lyons, Apple Computer Inc. employee [I know, you don't speak for your employer] admits to having been enticed by the evil lull of pirated software at one time or another in his mysterious past. Good. He is NOT (as previously surmised) the "paragon of virtue" that we all thought he was. -:) Seondly, I may not know how to spell "copyright"... but you sure as hell can't spell "relevant". Oh, well. (Shame on you for resorting to spelling errors to make your point!) >One thing that's interesting is that often the latest versions of software >show up on the pirate boards months before you can actually purchase it. I'm >still waiting for "Hyperstudio" (which I ordered from Tech Alliance a while >back); it's been out for over a month through the illegal channels... >That's interesting. Roger had stacks and stacks of them at AppleFest Boston. >It sold pretty well. If you got your copy illegally, it is probably >considerably buggier than the current version. Yeah, I saw Roger there selling all those buggy versions of Hyperstudio at Applefest. Actually, Roger is a great guy... and I really like his software. Too bad he was selling BETA versions of Hyperstudio at the 'Fest. As a matter of fact, I saw him demonstate Hyperstudio at a user group a month before the 'Fest, and he didn't even have a completed stack to show... just bits and pieces. And then there he was selling a 2/3 completed hypermedia package... Well, I don't PAY to be a beta tester, I'll wait until it's completed, thank you. But I will buy it. I will continue to buy all software that I use. Good software must be supported. [Actually, I was #251 on the list at Tech- Alliance, so it looks like Roger will do well with this ware.] However, another example is Dungeon Master GS. It took Egghead two months to get that one in their stores (Software Etc. was just as bad). And I live in LA, not Padooka! Dungeon Master is probably the best game I've seen for the GS. And we need all the games we can get! I'm not justifying software pirating, I'm just trying to explain some of the reasons people do it. Some do it for "collecting". Some do it for "previewing". Some do it for "fun" and the challenge. Some are outright thieves and do it so they can get something for nothing. Lynda "You'll pay to know what you really think"
SEWALL@UCONNVM.BITNET (Murph Sewall) (06/07/89)
>very few people out there on this network that consider VCR taping a CRIME! >Okay, all you video thieves, did you know that YOU are a criminal?). Whoa Lynda, you are overlooking the famous Betamax case (went all the way to the Supreme Court or perhaps the Supreme Court simply decided to let the appelate court ruling stand). It IS LEGAL to time shift (tape a program to view later) AND that includes taping a movie over the air or cable and playing it back for your personal (includes immediate family) enjoyment as many times as you like (interpretation of the "fair use" doctrine). What's not legal is using a second VCR (or a handy videocam) to make copies for distribution to friends (even if you give them away). I'm NOT a lawyer and I didn't read the news stories on the decision closely enough to determine whether making a copy of a RENTED movie for later viewing is equivalent to making a copy of a broadcast movie - the rented movies come with a copyright statement that says not, but... Movies rent in this area for $1.25 and the rental store is proximate to the grocery store and the gas station (hardly inconvenient :-) so it makes little sense to spend $5.00 on a blank tape to make a copy of a movie I've seen anyway (and can see again for only $1.25). That's a little different than purloining someone's computer program (for which repeated original use is possible) and not paying (even one cent) for it at all. Murph Sewall Vaporware? ---> [Gary Larson returns 1/1/90] Prof. of Marketing Sewall@UConnVM.BITNET Business School sewall%uconnvm.bitnet@mitvma.mit.edu [INTERNET] U of Connecticut {psuvax1 or mcvax }!UCONNVM.BITNET!SEWALL [UUCP] (203) 486-5246 [FAX] (203) 486-2489 [PHONE] 41 49N 72 15W [ICBM] -+- I don't speak for my employer, though I frequently wish that I could (subject to change without notice; void where prohibited)
gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn) (06/09/89)
In article <8906060718.AA29868@crash.cts.com> pnet01!pro-simasd!lbotez@nosc.mil writes: >And I doubt there are very few people out there on this network that >consider VCR taping a CRIME! You "doubt there are very few"; in other words, you think there are many. And that's probably right. I think it is quite widely known that showing taped copyright video material to others without permission of the copyright holder is not only illegal, it is ripping off the producers. Taping for personal use only is legal, the last time I checked (years ago). >Okay, all you video thieves, did you know that YOU are a criminal?). I'm not a video thief, for reasons similar to my not being a software thief. >I'm not justifying software pirating, I'm just trying to explain some of the >reasons people do it. Are you into psychopathology or what?
jib@prism.TMC.COM (06/09/89)
RE: Taping from Television
We are getting off the topic of Apple2s, but I don't think incorrect
information should be allowed to spread...
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that time-shifting of OVER-THE-AIR broadcasts
was permissible. That is ALL the betamax ruling held. That means that it
is clearly OK to tape a show from standard television for later viewing.
IT DOES NOT discuss (and therefore the legality is NOT clear) taping shows
from Cable; it does not discuss viewing time shifted tapes over and over
(or even keeping them after you watch them once). It is true that people
do this all the time and it is very unlikely anyone will challenge it, but
it is INCORRECT to say it is "legal." It is also incorrect to say it is
"illegal" since a court has not ruled on the precise issue.
Enough about this. If you want to discuss it further, try MISC.LEGAL.
(People should not post what they "THINK" is the law unless the know it to
be true).
Disclaimer: I AM a lawyer and I did read the articles about the Betamax
case, but I did NOT read the case itself and this article is my (somewhat
educated) opinion, NOT LEGAL ADVICE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jim Block jib@prism.TMC.COM
{mit-eddie, pyramid, harvard!wjh12, xait, datacube}!mirror!prism!jib
Matthew Bender Inc, 11 Penn Plaza, NY, NY 10001 (212) 216-8018dlyons@Apple.COM (David Lyons) (06/10/89)
In article <8906060718.AA29868@crash.cts.com> pnet01!pro-simasd!lbotez@nosc.mil writes: >>[...] And I hardly ever misspell "copyright" as >>"copywrite". >[...] >Seondly, I may not know how to spell "copyright"... but you sure as hell can't >spell "relevant". Oh, well. (Shame on you for resorting to spelling errors >to make your point!) Whoops...I wasn't actually referring to you. If you ever misspelled "copyright," I overlooked it. I was just going off on a tangent, as I'm sure Rasputin will tell you I do often. And I hereby resolve to spell "relevant" and "occurrence" correctly on occasion. --Dave Lyons, Apple Computer, Inc. | DAL Systems AppleLink--Apple Edition: DAVE.LYONS | P.O. Box 875 AppleLink--Personal Edition: Dave Lyons | Cupertino, CA 95015-0875 GEnie: D.LYONS2 or DAVE.LYONS CompuServe: 72177,3233 Internet/BITNET: dlyons@apple.com UUCP: ...!ames!apple!dlyons My opinions are my own, not Apple's.