russotto@eng.umd.edu (Matthew T. Russotto) (02/16/90)
In article <328@spectra.COM> scott@spectra (Tim Scott) writes: >What would halt the spread of crippleware would be the same >thing that halted the spread of copy protection. IMO. And what is that? 1) Refusal of people to buy copy-protected programs-- in this case, it would be a refusal to download crippleware... But for those of us with access to flat-rate BBSs or ftp sites or c.s.m.binaries on someone else's tab, that doesn't make sense. 2) Refusal of reviewers to give copy protected programs a review Reviewers ignore shareware, including crippleware, for the most part. 3) Widespread availablity of tools and methods to defeat copy protection Would this be legal in the case of crippleware? (i.e. could I post a message explaining exactly how MacPassword could be made fully functional, without fear of legal action against me) Is it ethical to tell people how to use a product without paying for it, as that is the only use for info on defeating crippleware (unlike the many uses for defeating copy protection)? What about 'commercial' crippleware? -- Matthew T. Russotto russotto@eng.umd.edu russotto@wam.umd.edu ][, ][+, ///, ///+, //e, //c, IIGS, //c+ --- Any questions?
rob@cs.mu.oz.au (Robert Wallen) (02/16/90)
In article <1990Feb16.041801.14160@eng.umd.edu> russotto@eng.umd.edu (Matthew T. Russotto) writes: >3) Widespread availablity of tools and methods to defeat copy protection >Would this be legal in the case of crippleware? (i.e. could I post a message >explaining exactly how MacPassword could be made fully functional, without >fear of legal action against me) >Is it ethical to tell people how to use a product without paying for it, as >that is the only use for info on defeating crippleware (unlike the many uses >for defeating copy protection)? Good question. Anyone out there who has MacNosy not been able to make at least one 'demo' product more usable? I can think of two which took about an hour between them ...