ins_anmy@jhunix.UUCP (Norman Yarvin) (08/09/87)
In article <184@nikhefk.UUCP> keeshu@nikhefk.UUCP (Kees Huyser) writes: >In article <470@bms-at.UUCP> stuart@bms-at.UUCP (Stuart D. Gathman) writes: >> >>The best method of protection for publishers I have seen is... The following is intended to be the final word on copy protection: :-) ------------------------------------------------------------------------- If you have physical control over the machine, you can copy and use ANY PIECE OF SOFTWARE. It may be an annoyance -- an annoyance that most companies assume you will not overcome -- but you CAN do it. If you do not have physical control over the computer, you may be able to copy some sotfware, but there is no guarantee. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thus dongles: they try to limit your control over the machine, but to really be impenetrable they would have to take total control over the machine at powerup, and be part of the (memory-protected) operating system. Of course even then you could run a different OS, unless the boot ROMs had the dongle code, and then you could replace the ROMs... Whereas on the computer I am working on now, there would be NO WAY for me to get my hands on any of that software -- other than physically breaking in and taking physical control of the machine -- which I do not plan to do. Of course if the superuser had left anything writeable from / to /etc/passwd, I could have wreaked havoc (of course I checked that long ago. :-) Norman Yarvin (seismo!umcp-cs | ihnp4!whuxcc | allegra!hopkins) !jhunix!ins_anmy "Unix is a hard nut to crack: once you get off the shell, there's nothing there but the kernel."
nick@lfcs.ed.ac.uk (Nick Rothwell) (12/21/88)
In article <107@microsoft.UUCP> clayj@microsoft.UUCP (Clay Jackson) writes: >I just purchased a copy of Managing Your Money, ... >... >The ^&(% thing is copy protected; in what I feel is the most onerous possible >way. You can COPY (but NOT diskcopy) the disks; but the program will randomly >ask you to insert your "master" disk. If you do not have your master handy, or >if it gets broken, you're SOL. MECA (the distributor) wants $15 for overnite >shipment of a new disk; otherwise, they'll take their sweet time. Yup. I'm in the same situation with Mark of the Unicorn's Performer on my Macintosh. This cost me L400 (around $700?), for which I get a dongle-disk. If this breaks, my music recording and composition stops dead until I can contact these people on some other continent and send them $10 or so (drawn on US currency, no doubt) for a replacement. Now, if I were running a recording studio or something with loadsamoney on the line, I'd be pretty irritated by this. This copy protection is going to make me think very carefully about ever using their sequencer in a live concert. Actually, I only find it a minor irritation at the moment. Should I lose the use of the master disk, the first thing I'll do is make a toll-free call across the Atlantic and demand a replacement. My last resort is to is fire up Copy II Mac and try to break the copy protection, or alter to program to not check it. Yup, I'm probably breaking their licence agreement. Actually, I'm less bothered now, since I have one (1) backup master disk they sent to all owners who register. Shame it took 4 months for this to arrive. Perhaps I'd better set this in perspective. I don't go around complaining about their copy protection all the time. I find it an irritation, but it hasn't lost me any time or money yet. Should this ever happen, I'll then feel justified in screaming and shouting about it... :-) >I really DISLIKE copy protection; but I can at least see the justification for >it on something like a game; but NOT on a Financial Package that is pretty >much useless without the manual (and support) in the first place. This is, I think, what it's all about. How do you see a software product? A disk and a manual? Or access to a software product with updates, help, etc? I get the impression that copy protection goes along with the view of software as a supermarket product ("Yup, we'll copy protect it so that we can shift more copies"). I hope that my $700 has actually bought me a support and update contract of some kind, with the RIGHT to contact these people, whenever necessary, at no cost to myself, to report bugs, get help, and so on. I think I'll try a toll-free trans-atlantic call and see what happens... >Clay Jackson Nick. -- Nick Rothwell, Laboratory for Foundations of Computer Science, Edinburgh. nick@lfcs.ed.ac.uk <Atlantic Ocean>!mcvax!ukc!lfcs!nick ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ...while the builders of the cages sleep with bullets, bars and stone, they do not see your road to freedom that you build with flesh and bone.
clayj@microsoft.UUCP (Clay Jackson) (12/28/88)
In article <1171@etive.ed.ac.uk> nick@lfcs.ed.ac.uk (Nick Rothwell) writes: >In article <107@microsoft.UUCP> clayj@microsoft.UUCP (Clay Jackson) writes: >>I just purchased a copy of Managing Your Money, ... >>... >This is, I think, what it's all about. How do you see a software >product? A disk and a manual? Or access to a software product with .... > Nick. I think Nick hit it on the head. I guess the next question is; where do you draw the line? What is a "supermarket commodity", and what is a software product? and, who pays for all of that support? What level of support is\ "acceptable" for what sort of product? I'm not sure I have all of the "right" answers, and I'm not sure that "right" here is even an absolute. Clay #include <std_disclaimer.h>