lauren@Rand-Unix.ARPA (04/16/84)
I'll agree with you on one point (and it may be our only point of agreement). Copy protection is a pain. It's a pain for the people who buy software, for the people who sell software, and (to some extent, we assume) for the software pirates. Given that no copy protection system can be perfect (though hardware-based systems utilizing encryption could make bypass very difficult) they may tend to act more as a challenge to pirates than as an effective deterrent. I for one would feel very insecure about buying software without some capability for backup. However, under such conditions, I wouldn't copy/steal the software -- I would simply do without if I was unwilling to put up with the non-backup hassle. It is unlikely that I will incorporate copy protection into any of the software that I sell in the future -- unless the backup problem can be solved in a reasonable manner. I will most certainly be ripped-off as a result. Unfortunately, the alternative would be to make life very painful for the buyers of such software, and I also find that unacceptable. --Lauren--
Ewing@YALE.ARPA (04/16/84)
From: Ricky Ewing <Ewing@YALE.ARPA> When I was in high school, I had a friend who is now at Brown University who commented to me four years ago about software piracy. He said that now it's alot of fun to get free software and some get their kicks trying to crack it but ten years from now, we'll be the same one's wringing our hands and crying, "Damn those software pirates". I've seen several types of systems to allow people to back up their software either once or several copies just so long as you boot the original disk first (of course what happens if the original disk refuses to boot?). Although useful, these systems are usually limiting and painful. Unfortunately it looks like at this rate, computer software might finally equalize out into pirated numbers that rival the record and tape business but it really need not be so. As I said in an earlier essay, it might be too late for us who are this age to change their ways, but with the microcomputer moving into the elementary school these days, maybe teachers ought to take the time to teach the little tykes about software ethics so that when they grow up, maybe less of them will pirate software. Does anyone have any other ideas to the situation? --Ricky-- -------
BRAIL@SEISMO.CSS.GOV (07/28/85)
Actually, computer software is not equivalent to a car, a
carton of eggs, or whatever, despite what othervax!ray pointed out.
Computer software is not, or at least not yet, a simple household
commodity. It can often mean millions of dollars in cost as well as in
work lost (if it doesn't work) to a company.
The car/tires argument can be used here if necessary. A car
without tires as about as useless as a computer without software. If
someone buys tires for their car, there is no law stopping them from
selling them to a friend, or putting them on another car. This is not
considered theft.
If something goes wrong with the car, it can almost always be
fixed anywhere. If worst comes to worst, one can always rent a car.
Finally, if a car is produced with a defect, the company must offer to
fix the defect for free on all cars.
Software is different. A misunderstanding of software, which
is as frequently caused by inadequate documentation as it is caused
by inadequate understanding of the product, is not always easy to fix.
Frequently, valueable time must be used talking to technical support
people. And defective software is as common as defective cars. Like
cars, the software is usually updated, although not always for free.
Let me also point out that, legally, 'shrink wrap' licences
are not valid. They do not allow the buyer an opportunity to find out
the conditions of the purchase before the purchase. There was an
excellent article in Byte a few months ago about this.
Basically, I feel that software should not be treated as a
carton of eggs should be. It is a very different subject. In real
life, disks do crash, die, wear out, get lost, or whatever. Backups
must be made, just as a car must carry a spare tire. Being towed (by a
wrecker or by the software company) can be expensive and a real drag.
ARPA: BRAIL@RU-BLUE.ARPA
UUCP:..!{allegra,harvard,sri-iu,ut-sally,ihnp4!packard}!topaz!ru-blue!brail
-------jrodrig@EDN-VAX.ARPA (Jose Rodriguez) (08/03/85)
Yestarday I read two tidbits of info in Infoworld to add to the copy protection discussion: 1) In California, a new law has been proposed that will require software manufacturers to guarantee some minimum level of behaviour from commercial software. This basically declares null (in my understanding) clauses of many (if not most) shrink wrap agreements. 2) Several companies (including Adam Osborne's Paperback Software) are coming with cheap clones of Lotus 123. Site license is part of all the clones. I bet Mitch Kapor is trying to figure out how to sue this people out of business. Let the good flames roll, Jose jrodrig@edn-vax
aii@pucc-k (mackenzie) (03/31/86)
Ultimate Copy Protection: I heard from a Tempest Engineer ( read noise expert ) that FCC standards for noise are not measured for any particular piece of software. They just turn the computer on and measure it's RF interference. As such, it would be possible to write a subroutine which maximized RFI. This RFI could be used to send a message in morse code such as HELP ME, I'VE BEEN KIDNAPED FROM XYZ COMPUTER COMPANY. Under this system when a product detects that it has been stolen, instead of stopping, or destroying the users hard disk, it would continue to run as usual, occasionally stopping to broadcast a message. Just an Idea. I don't intend to implement it. Michael MacKenzie Purdue University