bsmith@mprvaxa.UUCP (Brian Smith) (03/26/84)
<This line intentionally not left blank.>
I am probably going to catch sh*t for this, but I'm getting tired of
people making statements like "The microcomputer software industry is
losing billions of dollars a year due to software piracy." These
statements are usually based on the assumption that if N pirate copies of a
program are made, then that means a loss of N sales. This is simply not
true. Much of the piracy is by hobbyists with limited budgets. In many
cases, the hobbyist would not buy the pirated program in the first place.
So, while I am sure that sales are lost due to piracy, I am equally
sure that the amount is far less than some would have us believe.
What is my solution to the problem? Reduce the prices to the level
where the average user is willing to pay to get an original diskette,
instructions, and package. For games, I figure this to be about ten or
fifteen bucks. For other types of programs? Well, Turbo Pascal might be
a good example.
Protection schemes don't work. No matter how clever you are in
protecting your software, there is someone equally clever who will figure
out how to copy it.
Footnote: A friend of mine wrote and markets a spelling checker for
the TRS-80. He occasionally gets calls that go something like: "I've been
using your program and I think it's really great, so I'd like to buy a
copy."
Brian Smith (mprvaxa!bsmith)
Microtel Pacific Research
(The opinions expressed in this article are not necessarily those of any
real person, living or dead.)ken@ihuxq.UUCP (ken perlow) (03/27/84)
-- >>> ... I'm getting tired of >>> people making statements like "The microcomputer software industry is >>> losing billions of dollars a year due to software piracy." These >>> statements are usually based on the assumption that if N pirate copies >>> of a program are made, then that means a loss of N sales. This is >>> simply not true. I agree. Good software can stand the free advertising. Indeed, I know folks who have pirated software and liked it so much they bought their own copies. The rationale: "Let's keep a good company in business." Also, they were able to get updated versions, all documentation, and plenty of help from a phone call, things not available when you pirate programs. Writers of quality software should understand that one can steal their code but not their reputation. -- *** *** JE MAINTIENDRAI ***** ***** ****** ****** 27 Mar 84 [7 Germinal An CXCII] ken perlow ***** ***** (312)979-7261 ** ** ** ** ..ihnp4!ihuxq!ken *** ***
ignatz@ihuxx.UUCP (Dave Ihnat, Chicago, IL) (03/28/84)
This is a very sore point with me. I *will not* steal software--and Ghod knows of the temptations in this business, with wildly over-inflated prices and poor customer relations. But some people are starting to operate quite intelligently; here are some real-life, current examples: MicroSolutions, of DeKalb, IL markets a program called Uniform. It's a CP/M program to provide diskette formatting and interchange capabilities for a wide range of computers. Originally marketed at $49.95, the price was perfect; but it 'featured' an elaborate copy protection scheme that rendered the master copy good ONLY for making two (count 'em--2) copies of the program. These diskettes could not be copied, and the master couldn't be executed. If those disks ever went bad, you had to send in the master to be re-genned, for a $10.00 fee. This led to two things--first, my losing a night of sleep to figure out their scheme (I did), and secondly, scads of complaints to MicroSolutions. In an amazing burst of reason, they re-issued an improved version of the program, without the obnoxious copy protection. (Unfortunately, shortly after the re-release the price climbed to $69.95, but it's still just within the reach of a reasonable price.) J. G. Communications, of Tucson, AZ markets a hardware real-time clock for the Osborne 1; along with the hardware is a decent set of utility programs. They will sell the source to these programs--on a floppy, with documentation--for $12.00; the object comes free with the clock. Rationale? As the author told me, "They can have the source. I'll have something better out before they can." Makes bug fixes and reports much easier. I'm afraid I'll have to withhold the name of the company, and the product, for this last one; I haven't asked the person involved if they want full details popularly known on this deal. But suffice to say that the author of a quite popular 'C' compiler, who is a friend of mine, discovered that I am doing some work on a Zenith Z-100, but the people who bought the machine aren't going to shell out the $300-$400 such a compiler costs. He *gave* me a current copy of his system, with only the constraint that I not further distribute it. Purpose? He wants me to work with it, get to know it, and recommend it. (I just don't know if he wants people to know about the freebie.) If this product ran on my z80-based machine, you'd better damn well believe *I'd* shell out the cash, after working with it; and at least one client has ordered the system, because of my recommendation. Purpose of this (much longer than I intended) article? To show that all is not darkness on the software market, and, frankly, to spread the name of those companies that are making some effort to work with consumers, instead of against them. Dave Ihnat ihuxx!ignatz
mckeeman@wivax.UUCP (03/29/84)
There is little disagreement that using software that is for sale and for which you have not paid is wrong. So is making a copy of an article out of BYTE. The most effective solution I have seen is software that announces its ownership and how to pay for it, and where to get the documentation. If the software is real cheap ($15+costs) most folks will prefer to pay to have a clear conscience. The documentation is much easier to protect -- print it in a xerox-combatting color or size. And charge more for it. I paid $60 for the IBM DOS manual and to my surprise found a DOS-floppy in it. The folks who are trying to follow the American dream and get rich (not the poor little fellow hunched over his ADM3) will have to learn to protect their products. It is illegal to rob a bank. It is also hard and dangerous. You also do not brag about it in public. (FLAME ON) Let's hear more inventiveness and less whining on this issue. (FLAME OFF) Bill McKeeman Wang Institute ...decvax!wivax!mckeeman
2141smh@aluxe.UUCP (henning) (03/30/84)
Correction: It is not illegal to copy an article out of Byte if you bought the magazine and only you use the copy. That is "Fair Use". Of course that is true of software.
andrew@orca.UUCP (Andrew Klossner) (03/30/84)
I'd like to demonstrate how some recent comments defending software
piracy can be applied to another industry.
"I'm getting tired of people making statements like "The
microcomputer software industry is losing billions of dollars a
year due to software piracy." These statements are usually
based on the assumption that if N pirate copies of a program
are made, then that means a loss of N sales. This is simply
not true. Much of the piracy is by hobbyists with limited
budgets. In many cases, the hobbyist would not buy the pirated
program in the first place."
Ditto for automobile theft, where people assume that N car thefts imply
a loss of N car sales. Also not true. Much car theft is by hobbyists
with limited budgets. In many cases, the hobbyist would not buy the
stolen car in the first place.
"So, while I am sure that sales are lost due to piracy, I am
equally sure that the amount is far less than some would have
us believe."
And no doubt some car sales are lost due to theft, but I'm quite sure
that the amount is far less than some would have us believe.
"What is my solution to the problem? Reduce the prices to the
level where the average user is willing to pay to get an
original diskette, instructions, and package. For games, I
figure this to be about ten or fifteen bucks. For other types
of programs? Well, Turbo Pascal might be a good example."
And I think the solution to the car theft problem is to reduce car
prices to the level where the average driver is willing to pay to get a
new car and owner's manual. For Hondas, I figure this to be about four
hundred dollars. For other types of cars? Well, Army surplus jeeps
might be a good example.
"Protection schemes don't work. No matter how clever you are
in protecting your software, there is someone equally clever
who will figure out how to copy it."
Auto ripoff protection schemes don't work. No matter how clever you
are in locking and anti-burglarizing your car, there is someone equally
clever who will figure out how to steal it.
---------------
My point is that it is a fallacy to claim that software piracy is
somehow okay because the evil software vendors overcharge or the poor
hobbyists can't afford to buy all the wonderful software. These issues
are not relevant to the question of right or wrong.
Using someone's software without permission is stealing. A person who
does this is a thief. It's as simple as that.
-- Andrew Klossner (decvax!tektronix!orca!andrew) [UUCP]
(orca!andrew.tektronix@rand-relay) [ARPA]els@pur-phy.UUCP (Eric Strobel) (03/31/84)
I really wish people would admit/signify that certain thoughts
about this issue are a matter of their personal ethics. To some,
piracy = theft. If you feel that way fine, but that doesn't make
it true! PERSONALLY, I equate this issue with that of the people
who have been sued for building antennas and converters for HBO
transmissions. If a transmission is available for me to pick up,
then I'll pick it up when ever I damn well please. If HBO doesn't
like it then they should encode their transmission in a manner that
makes it somehow easier for me to rent the equipment from them, than
it is for me to do it myself. Similarly, software houses should
put something into the program to make it difficult to copy. If I
would have to spend weeks trying to hack out a copy of some program,
I'll probably just say the hell with it and go out and buy it.
To put in plainer terms, if there has been no effort made
to protect the software, then making a copy is just like picking
up a $20 bill off of the street; i.e. the former owner was careless
with it, so tough!
The big exception, of course, is with licenced software. By
copying this stuff, you help your friend to break a formal contract.
On top of the legality problems, the person who loaned you the
software has proven that his word is worthless! 'nuff said.
All I can say about the small one-person software producers, is
that they can use their modems and band together.
P.S. I fully expect flames about this, but I'd rather hear
(and might even enjoy) some thoughtful criticism.
(Hopefully, the above line will douse most of those who
type without thinking.)
(`') (`')
\\ _____ // Writing cause I got work, hanging by
\\ / \ // my bruised ,bleeding and mangled thumbs
\/ O O \/ at the off-the-wall teddy bear keyboard of
| o |
\_____/ ERIC STROBEL
/|+++|\
//-----\\ decvax!pur-ee!Physics:els
// \\
(_^_) (_^_)
alan@allegra.UUCP (Alan S. Driscoll) (04/01/84)
[] ... If a transmission is available for me to pick up, then I'll pick it up when ever I damn well please. If HBO doesn't like it then they should encode their transmission in a manner that makes it somehow easier for me to rent the equipment from them, than it is for me to do it myself... ... if there has been no effort made to protect the software, then making a copy is just like picking up a $20 bill off of the street; i.e. the former owner was careless with it, so tough... Hmm... I pay for HBO, and the last time I found a bill on the ground, I found out who it belonged to and returned it. Maybe Eric will think I'm a bit strange, but that's ok, because I think he's a putz. ... certain thoughts about this issue are a matter of their personal ethics... Personal ethics? What the hell does this guy know about personal ethics? -- Alan S. Driscoll AT&T Bell Laboratories
faustus@ucbvax.UUCP (Wayne Christopher) (04/01/84)
Andrew Klossner's argument that stealing cars is like stealing software would be quite correct if you could stick your car into your garage, press a button, and make a duplicate car, and in fact a lot of people did favors for their friends by making them cars like this. If this happened I would say that the automobile industry was in a lot of trouble. Nobody would think of making it illegal to do this, though (except those who believe in things like farm price supports). Clearly when a software product comes out, a certain number of people are going to buy the thing, and then a certain number of additional people are going to get copies from them. Software companies should expect this and market their products accordingly. For the government to support those who cannot write good software and would not survive without the "protection" of the copywrite laws is like paying farmers to destroy their crops to keep food prices high... Wayne Christopher
robert@erix.UUCP (Robert Virding) (04/01/84)
>> (FLAME ON) >> Let's hear more inventiveness and less whining on this >> issue. >> (FLAME OFF) >> >> Bill McKeeman Wang Institute ...decvax!wivax!mckeeman More inventiveness in what? How to steal software? If the methods (of stealing) were spread, or perhaps the products, then there would be less whining on this issue. N'est-ce pas? :-) Robert Virding UUCP: {decvax!philabs}!mcvax!enea!erix!robert
canas@ut-sally.UUCP (Daniel Canas) (04/02/84)
a
Has anyone have to wait 2 or 3 (or more weeks) because your legitimate copy
of XXXX did not boot and you did not have a backup copy because it was
protected?
When this does happen to you then you will consider "illegal" backups
legal.
--
Daniel Canas, Computer Sciences Dept. University of Texas at Austin,
{ihnp4,kpno,ut-ngp}!ut-sally!canasmmr@utmbvax.UUCP (Mike Rubenstein) (04/02/84)
> Has anyone have to wait 2 or 3 (or more weeks) because your legitimate copy > of XXXX did not boot and you did not have a backup copy because it was > protected? > When this does happen to you then you will consider "illegal" backups > legal. No, I've never had that problem because I refuse to purchase any copy protected software. I don't think many of those who've been flaming about stealing software consider backups illegal, no matter what the licensing agreement. I'd consider that fair use. It's unfortunate that publishers feel they have to resort to copy protection schemes to protect themselves. To my mind, that makes the software worthless. Well, maybe they're just being shrewd. Making something worthless should reduce theft quite a bit. -- Mike Rubenstein, OACB, UT Medical Branch, Galveston TX 77550
alan@allegra.UUCP (Alan S. Driscoll) (04/02/84)
Mike won't buy software that's copy protected, because it isn't worth the
hassle. Eric won't buy software that isn't copy protected -- he'll steal
it ("like finding a $20 bill on the ground"). This all leaves the people
selling the software caught between a rock and a hard place...
--
Alan S. Driscoll
AT&T Bell Laboratoriessleat@aat.UUCP (04/03/84)
Andrew Klossner posts an analogy between stealing software and stealing
a car. All analogies have their fallacies, but this analogy is particularly
bad. It would perhaps have been better (if more abstract) had he phrased
it in terms of making an instantaneous copy of the car, rather than removing
the physical object itself.
With his analogy he obscures the central dilemma of the issue, namely that
there is a fundamental difference between stealing a physical object and
stealing information. Whereas it is his right to equate the two on a moral
level, attempting to equate the two on the physical level helps neither his
case nor any resolution of the social issue.
Were the situation as simple as he indicates, this discussion would not
be taking place. It is certainly his perogative to issue his own moral
admonishments, but I find it offensive to have such admonishments couched
in terms of faulty reasoning.
Michael Sleator
Ann Arbor Terminals
{mb2c|cbosgd|uofm-cv|psu-cs}!aat!sleatwjb@burl.UUCP (Bill Buie) (04/03/84)
-- >The answer to the current problem of piracy is very simple. >Allow customers to copy all the software they want. Then have >the new owners send in a $5-$10 dollar payment to the author. >Also why not sell these newly registered owners the documentation >for a reasonable cost (1 to 20 dollars). The answer to the current problem is *NOT* that simple. People who rationalize that it's moral to steal that which belongs to another person ultimately are going to pick another rationalization to steal when the old one becomes obsolete. To put it another way, I really do doubt that a substantial number of pirates out there are going to send in money that they don't have to. Why aren't they sending it in now? -- --Bill Buie
wjb@burl.UUCP (Bill Buie) (04/03/84)
-- Allow me partially disclaim my earlier flame. There are two reasons why pirates will not send in reimbursement: 1) They may not know where to send the money. 2) They may fear that such a donation could open them up to litigation. In fact, I'm sure that it would. So, given that the pirate stole initially, it is not surprising that the pirate would decline initiative to reimburse. I'll still stand by what I said about the flimsiness of rationalization, though. -- --Bill Buie
geoff@callan.UUCP (Geoff Kuenning) (04/04/84)
A small point for those who think overpriced software provides justification for "appropriating" it at no cost: If I think a car, a diamond ring, or a hamburger is overpriced, I have a simple response: I don't buy it. Instead, I go somewhere where I can buy it at a price I find reasonable. That's called "free-market capitalism". What I *don't* do is sneak in behind the back of the person who is overpricing the product and avail myself of it free of charge. That's called "theft". Geoff Kuenning Callan Data Systems ...!ihnp4!sdcrdcf!trwrb!wlbr!callan!geoff Vax? Is that a 68000 with the bytes going the other way?
marc@aat.UUCP (04/04/84)
Speaking of ethics, trust, maturity, etc., I was very impressed last time I was in Windsor to see newspaper racks on the street where the papers were on an open stand with an attached coin box. You know, "honor system".... Think you'd ever see this in the U.S.?
binder@dosadi.DEC (Do not adjust your set...) (04/04/84)
> The answer to the current problem of piracy is very simple. > Allow customers to copy all the software they want. Then have > the new owners send in a $5-$10 dollar payment to the author. > Also why not sell these newly registered owners the documentation > for a reasonable cost (1 to 20 dollars). > ihuxf!bryan > Bryan DeLaney Finally, someone comes up with the right idea. But you aren't the first - I have an Apple ][+, and I am using Diversi-DOS, put out by DSR, Inc. When you boot up the Diversi-DOS master disk, you see a screen full of text, of which the first line reads: PLEASE COPY THIS DISK AND GIVE IT TO EVERYONE YOU KNOW!! Further words explain that, if you are the recipient of such a copy, it's illegal to use the program without paying for it, and that the price is $30.00, please mail to <address>. Doing so will get you on the list for updates and telephone hot line assistance, etc. The kicker is the line that reads, "YOUR HONESTY WILL HELP US TO DISTRIBUTE FUTURE PROGRAMS IN THIS SAME LOW COST WAY." I dunno about you people out there in netland, but I got my copy by sending in $30.00 after I was given a disk with just the DOS and that message on it. Best investment I ever made. Cheers, Dick Binder decvax!decwrl!rhea!dosadi!binder Posted Wednesday 4th April 1984, 08:49 Eastern time by DOSADI::BINDER
seaburg@uiucdcs.UUCP (seaburg ) (04/05/84)
#R:ihuxf:-213400:uiucdcs:10400125:000:213 uiucdcs!seaburg Apr 4 21:10:00 1984 Good programmers won't spend hours, weeks, months writing GOOD software if all they get for it is $10 a shot. Also, good usable manuals take time to write and the materials do in fact cost $money. Be serious.
sleat@aat.UUCP (04/05/84)
Wayne Christopher says in regard to duplicating cars, "Nobody would think
of making it illegal to do this". I beg to differ.
There is first of all the question of patents. If one refrained from
selling the duplicates, perhaps one would not be in violation of the
laws regarding patented components of the car. I don't know very much
about patent law, so I cannot speak to this point byond simply raising
it.
More to the point though, is the matter of copyright. I haven't heard of
any car manufacturers copyrighting body designs, etc, but I see no reason
why such protection shouldn't be extended to them. I believe I've seen
copyright protection applied in much more absurd cases than this.
Michael Sleator
Ann Arbor Terminals
{cbosgd|mb2c|uofm-cv|psu-cs}!aat!sleattrb@masscomp.UUCP (04/05/84)
aat!marc notes: Speaking of ethics, trust, maturity, etc., I was very impressed last time I was in Windsor to see newspaper racks on the street where the papers were on an open stand with an attached coin box. You know, "honor system".... Think you'd ever see this in the U.S.? The Chase Farms cider mill in Littleton, MA (right next to the Masscomp building we were in until last November, when we moved a mile down the road to Westford) has an unattended refrigerator with fresh cider in it, a price list, a locked wooden box for putting your paper money in, and an adequate supply of loose change sitting in a tray. You takes your cider, you pays your money. Right here in the U.S. Right now. Andy Tannenbaum Masscomp Inc Westford MA (617) 692-6200 x274
kalm@ihuxw.UUCP (James ) (04/05/84)
> Speaking of ethics, trust, maturity, etc., I was very impressed last time > I was in Windsor to see newspaper racks on the street where the papers > were on an open stand with an attached coin box. You know, "honor system".... > Think you'd ever see this in the U.S.? We USED to!!! -- Jim Kalmadge - AT&T Bell Labs IX 1c415 8-367-0475 (312) 979-0475 ihuxw!kalm
jbn@wdl1.UUCP (John B. Nagle) (04/06/84)
Piracy is a real problem for the high-cost business package. One big plus is that at the high end, users expect support, and when someone calls in asking for help, one has a chance to find out if he is legit or not by asking for the serial number of his package. Once you find someone with an unauthorized copy, dealing with them is a problem, but with some of the new anti-piracy laws, putting them behind bars is getting easier. It's a hassle getting them prosecuted, but it's amazing how the word gets around that you don't tolerate piracy once you get somebody jailed.
rehmi@umcp-cs.UUCP (04/06/84)
> mprvaxa!bsmith: > > Apple is fighting clone machines on every side while no-one is cloning > Commodore 64's. The main reason for this is the Apple is priced much > higher than it has any right to be. (The development costs were probably > paid for by the first ten sales; the garage was paid for by the next ten) Actually, the development costs were paid by HP... Wozniak designed the thing for them and they didn't like it. The garage might have already been paid for; who knows what financial state he was in? -- Uucp: ..!seismo!umcp-cs!rehmi By the fork, spoon, and exec CsNet: rehmi.umcp-cs@csnet-relay of Khron, Kernel ContreMain, ArpaNet: rehmi@maryland Earl of Tetravale & Tumbolia.
Knisely@his-phoenix-multics.arpa (04/06/84)
A number of related issues are being discussed (and flamed about, raved
about, etc) here. At the risk of adding to growing pool of half-truth
and self justification, here goes.
First, if I remember my business law (and its been awhile, got a lawyer
hidden in this group?), then software piracy is not technically theft --
but it is usually a clear violation of the copyright laws. Now, no
matter what justification you put on it, it is still ILLEAGAL to do
that. If you feel the need to rationalize having done so by saying that
the product was not worth the price asked, then I hope you are not
deluding yourself that this made it any less illegal, and subject to
prosecution. HOWEVER, there are a number of issues concerning the
copyright laws and software licenses that are not so clear cut, and
deserve thoughtful discussion, and the recent chain of items on multiple
CPU licensing is one of those subjects.
Software piracy is one of the hottest issues going, and I, like most,
have strong, but sometimes mixed feelings about it. The idea that if
the producer didn't bother to heavily protect the software, then he's
being careless and its then ok to pirate it, is one that especially
bothers me. I have a legitimate right as a purchaser/user of the
software to be able to create archive backup copies for my own use. It
has gotten to the point now that very little home software comes in
unprotected form. About half of what I have bought recently is
impossible for me to backup with unmodified hardware. Now, either I go
out and spend a couple hundred dollars on hardware/software that will
let me beat these (but the next ones ?) schemes, or I'm
left vulnerable to the loss of a product I paid hard earned cash
for. Too many producers have adopted policies which make it
difficult, expensive or impossible for me to get backup copies from
them, and I find that a real problem. And the problem gets worse every
day, mostly because of the attitudes and actions of a large minority of
people who, for whatever reason, either see no wrong in piracy or justify
it or rationalise it. Now I am not in the software-for-sale business, I
am a user; a user who is increasingly maddened by this situation. Yes,
I think software is grossly over-priced in some areas, but noone is
forcing me to buy it. If the software isn't worth (to me) the price,
then either I find a new price, different software or I do without. I
think that piracy is irresponsible and is damaging the industry for all
of us.
Ok folks, let's hear some discussion of how we can solve this problem.
How do we preserve the rights of the user to legitimate copy
capabilities, provide him a useful way to examine and try the software
before purchase, how should industry determine realistic returns on
investment, is there a technical/ procedural/legal solution to the
pirating???
...Dick...(Knisely.DSP1 -at CISL)young@Uci-750a.ARPA (04/06/84)
From: Michal Young <young@Uci-750a.ARPA> Bravo, Alan. There are others out here who attempt to return a found item, who call it to the clerk's attention when we receive too much change, etc. It is, as the previous correspondent noted, a matter of `personal ethics,' but not quite in the sense he intended. It is a matter of having personal ethics or not. --Michal Young, UC Irvine young@uci
jr@fortune.UUCP (John A. Rogers) (04/07/84)
Re: backups vs. protected software
On some systems (e.g. the various Fortune UNIX-based systems), it is possible
to have protected software that can be backed up. Unfortunately, it requires
that the original (and the copies) can somehow be "serialized" to a given
machine, maybe via a serial number in a ROM of some sort. I realize that this
isn't applicable to all systems, but it is a possibility.
Didn't I hear something (a year ago?) about one or more chip manafacturers
offering CPU chips that had serial numbers in them? (SEEQ is probably
working on something along those lines, I would guess).
See ya!
--
JR (John Rogers)
UUCP: {ihnp4,cbosgd,ucbvax!amd70}fortune!jrmar@Mit-Borax.ARPA (04/07/84)
From: Mark A. Rosenstein <mar@Mit-Borax.ARPA> A better anology than car theft is the problems the entertainment industry is going through with tape recorders for both records and movies. People have been copying records onto cassettes longer than there have been home computers, and the record industry has not found a fix for that yet. Records do have better quality than tapes, and consequently many people buy the record anyway, also to get the album cover, however that is the same as buying some software to get the instructions. The closest thing the entertainment industry has found to a solution is taxing the purchase of blank tapes, which has been proposed but never adopted (hopefully they never will). The problem seems to be fundamental that for any read/write media that is usefull, it is possible to make illicit copies of materials distributed on that media. Perhaps personal ethics are the only thing stopping this from getting compeletly out of proportion. -Mark
richard@sequent.UUCP (04/07/84)
I'd love to be able to "back up" my car, even if the purpose wasn't for sales. You know, just in case the first one "crashed" or developed format problems. Right. ___________________________________________________________________________ from the confused and bleeding fingertips of ...!sequent!richard
KSPROUL@RUTGERS.ARPA (04/08/84)
One thing that I dont understand is that magazines such as BYTE ALLOW want ads in there magazine (which are FREE, so BYTE has the right to censor them) that say... 'Want to trade software for xxx computer, you send me your list, I will send you mine....' I feel that ads like this are 99% of the time, people wanting to trade comercial programs NOT programs that are public domain or that they themselves wrote.. BYTE and other magazines SHOULD censor these ads and thus discourage software piracy by way of US Mail, which could probably be a Federal Offence, instead of just a case of 'stealing' something worth $50. Keith Sproul Ksproul@Rutgers.arpa -------
seaburg@uiucdcs.UUCP (seaburg ) (04/08/84)
#R:erix:-32000:uiucdcs:10400128:000:80 uiucdcs!seaburg Apr 7 23:59:00 1984 So why do we have copyright laws in the first place? ...pur-ee!uiucdcs!seaburg
RIZZI@Usc-Isib.ARPA (04/09/84)
From: Bill Rizzi <RIZZI@Usc-Isib.ARPA>
The entertainment analogy is certainly more appropriate than
car theft, particularly when the work is the product of an individual
or small group of "talent", engineered, produced and distributed.
One of the major differences, however is that software must be continually
supported whereas once songs or films are in the can, it's mostly a
function of marketing.
Bill (RIZZI@ISIB)
-------Little@HI-MULTICS.ARPA (04/09/84)
(my my ain't it interesting what happens when one keys down with 80
watts on 2 meters side-band in the same room with the modem)
Ok, you don't like auto theft as an analogy, because one deprives where
as the is tied up in litigation. Sooooo, it is neat and spiffy for
some nerdling to be able to copy what ever his/her/its itty bitty
little heart desires on his Byte Cruncher 1000, huhh? I suppose then
that it is perfectly all right for me to acquire YOUR marvy doctoral
thesis on why the African Testes Fly is sterile between 0200 and 0300,
acquire copios amounts of white out, spend about 2 hours with scissors,
rulers, erasers, and a DUPLICATING machine called a XEROX, or KODAK, and
come up with my Masters thesis. After all, if the club in Podunk, Missouri
can, for the price of one, pass out 100 copies of 1-2-3 with
documentation and updates - no charge mind you, just "back-ups
(heh,heh)", then why should I bother with piddling little things like
copyright.
My gosh, just think what I could do. "Lucifer's Hammer" could become
"Fly Swatter", by Gary G. Little. I could rename "Ringworld" to "World
Wheel" and develope an epic that would make "Star Wars" (which becomes
"Day of the Yugi's") pale in insignificance.
Seriously, making backups is one thing, and I think you should be able
to make an unlimited number of them, because disks do crap out, and
people do make mistakes, but to pass a copy off as a back-up and then
give that backup to a friend is a cop-out. My rule of thumb is that if
you want to see how it works, stop by and fiddle with it all that you want.
But no you can not have the updates that I paid for, nor copies of the
documents. As to the groups that buy one and copy 100, it would be
equitable if each one only got on hundredth of the product -- half a
page and a corner of the jacket.
Ah well, somuch for moralizing. Besides, you won't change your mind,
the same as I won't change mine -- you losy commie pinko spy.
Gary
Little.Fleas@HI-MULTICSnotes@iuvax.UUCP (04/09/84)
#R:callan:-14300:iuvax:400010:000:568 iuvax!unix68 Apr 8 20:04:00 1984 [] Although I am not condoning software piracy, I think it would be more fair to say that you are not stealing in the sense of stealing a car which would take the car away from someone else, but you would be in effect making a copy of the car. If you were literally stealing the software in the sense that you steal cars, you would need to take the original off the shelf, stuff it into your pocket and walk out of the store. But I don't think most software pirates use that method. -- James Conley Indiana University at Bloomington ...iuvax!jec
ron@brl-vgr.ARPA (Ron Natalie <ron>) (04/09/84)
It's easy to back up your car. Just move the lever to the "R" position. -Ron
steve@Brl-Bmd.ARPA (04/11/84)
From: Stephen Wolff <steve@Brl-Bmd.ARPA> Douglas J. Albert and Stephen P. Morse, "Combatting Software Piracy by Encryption and Key Management", COMPUTER, V.17 #4, April '84, pp 68-73.
ignatz@ihuxx.UUCP (Dave Ihnat, Chicago, IL) (04/11/84)
Without going too much into it, please read the latest issue of Mini-Micro systems for a fascinating--and disturbing--new product that is being marketed as a software protection scheme. Basically, there is a physical "fingerprint" actually embedded on the surface of a floppy diskette, at a random track/sector location. The protected software knows about it, and can (somehow--not explained in the article) access it. Thus, if the software is on a different disk or diskette, no go. Problems? On a hard-disk system, the device must be in the floppy drive. Also, backups aren't--you can't copy the "fingerprint", so the program on the backup disk won't run without the original. The manufacturer maintains that, since you aren't permitted to write the sector/track that the fingerprint resides on, it can't go bad (?), and the backup is adequate; but they admit that they expect to end up in court. (I don't mind the protection, but if the backup depends on the integrity of the original disk, I don't trust it.) As for the diskette always having to be in the boot drive, they say they're figuring out a way to stamp hard disks. (How about multiple proprietary, protected programs? They don't address it.) AT&T is supposed to have purchased rights to use this scheme, according to the article. If people want details--the vol. and issue numbers of the Mini-Micro Systems copy, company names, etc--I'll get them. (I'm at work, the 'zine is at home). Just ask. Dave Ihnat ihuxx!ignatz
ken@ihuxq.UUCP (ken perlow) (04/12/84)
--
You can call it stealing, as the law does, but that does not make it
immoral. Is sex between unmarried consenting adults immoral? In
most states it's sure as hell illegal. I don't condone the copying
of software you're asked not to, but the issue is a real hard one.
When you engage in that activity, you have gained something, but
all the other person has lost (*NOT* like a car or jewelry, analogies
that have been proposed) is a potential market. Most who buy
Illinois lottery tickets lose a potential fortune every day,
but somehow the state will not believe they've been ripped off.
The laws on software piracy exist to make it easier for software
producers to make a profit. That is neither good nor bad--that's
how America works. Parts of the tax code do the same for other
industries. To say "you broke the law, so you are a bad person"
is to hide behind a very artificial distinction. Laws on software
piracy have nothing to do with morality. I believe there is a tenet
in law called "status to sue." If you violate my civil rights, say
by illegal search and seizure--a 4th Amendment proscription, but I
can't show I've been damaged, I can't sue you. No damage, no wrong.
Your action will possibly inconvenience me, perhaps embarrass me, but
if I can't peg that to real suffering I have no case. So one
solution (to which I have no attachment) is for aggrieved software
writers, on a case by case basis, to have to prove damages. The
principle of "de minimis" (the law does not bother with trifles,
which is why no one ever sues for $1.50) should also apply. Comments?
--
*** ***
JE MAINTIENDRAI ***** *****
****** ****** 05 Apr 84 [16 Germinal An CXCII]
ken perlow ***** *****
(312)979-7261 ** ** ** **
..ihnp4!ihuxq!ken *** ***seaburg@uiucdcs.UUCP (04/13/84)
#R:sri-arpa:-1207300:uiucdcs:10400130:000:10 uiucdcs!seaburg Apr 13 13:28:00 1984 I agree.
ok@edai.UUCP (Richard O'Keefe) (04/14/84)
If people make backup copies, that doesn't represent lost sales. If they give copies to their friends, that does represent lost sales. What we'd like is a method for discouraging the latter but not the former. Doesn't matter if it doesn't stop ALL thefts, nothing's going to do that, all the method has to do is persaude some of the morally shaky purchasers that piracy isn't prudent. So how about this: 1) Distribute object code. 2) Include 4 bytes in each program which serve as a (possibly encoded, say 1/256th of the numbers are valid) serial number. 3) In return for his $30, the purchaser obtains the right to make any number of copies for his own use, but he promises that in the event of anyone else being found to have a copy of his copy, he will pay the author $100 per stolen copy, up to a maximum of $2000. (These figures as guesses.) He further promises to pay a similar sum for each copy in his possession which does not bear the right number. 4) When you think someone has a stolen copy, check the serial number. Checking the number of a stolen copy catches the backyard pirate (sometimes). The pirate who makes a business of it and zeroes the serial number still pays if you can catch him by other means (sometimes). The question is whether sometimes is enough. Worth a try?
judd@umcp-cs.UUCP (04/14/84)
<>
Many people sell there expertice in a field for $20-$40 in the form of text
books. No one loses any money on these and yet the market is not as large
as the (potential) market for good software.
Thus I believe people could make a living writing good software, providing
usfull documentation and some support and charge between $20 and $100.
The current prices (and copy protection policies) are a dissaster and may
yet destroy the home computer market.
Judd Rogers
--
Spoken: Judd Rogers
Arpa: judd.umcp-cs@CSNet-relay
Uucp:...{allegra,seismo}!umcp-cs!juddawb@Brl-Mis.ARPA (04/14/84)
From: Austin W. Barrows (IBD/ICB) <awb@Brl-Mis.ARPA> Beautiful!
seaburg@uiucdcs.UUCP (04/15/84)
#R:sri-arpa:-1207300:uiucdcs:10400132:000:172 uiucdcs!seaburg Apr 15 11:14:00 1984 My agreement was to the note about free ads in magazines. They ought to be responsible enough to do what they can to curtail piracy. Sorry if I didn't make myself clear.
phil@amd70.UUCP (Phil Ngai) (04/15/84)
There's a difference between the authors of books and the authors
of software: the former don't have to provide support. That makes
software more expensive, by a non-trival amount.
--
Phil Ngai (408) 988-7777 {ucbvax,decwrl,ihnp4,allegra,intelca}!amd70!philnotes@iuvax.UUCP (04/16/84)
#R:sri-arpa:-1207300:iuvax:400013:000:788 iuvax!apratt Apr 15 16:33:00 1984 Fortunately, as stated in another part of this discussion, we in America are innocent until proven guilty. That means that "Will trade software" means "I have written some software, and if you have, too, we can trade them" until you ascertain that the parties are using illegal copies of programs for barter. It is not up to BYTE magazine to ascertain that. If the people are breaking the law, it is up to the people/companies whom they are trespassing against to see them brought to justice. Also, fortunately, we in America tend to favor liberal editorial policies, rather than restrictive ones. It is within the editor's scope of duties to refuse to publish ads which offer illegal services, but his judgement reigns supreme. -- Allan Pratt ...ihnp4!inuxc!iuvax!apratt
Ewing@YALE.ARPA (04/16/84)
From: Ricky Ewing <Ewing@YALE.ARPA> I've been monitoring this loud discussion about software piracy and although I've heard alot of pro and con, I really haven't heard any real reasons why people generally pirate software. Are you doing it to tell the software houses that you'd rather have unprotected software? Are you doing it because software prices are too high? Or are you doing it for the shell hell of it? As one who cracks program protection schemes for my utter enjoyment, I'd like to hear from some of you that have pirated software and why (I have my own reasons so no flames please, just address the general topic (Lauren :-) ). Maybe if enough of us give some valid reasons, maybe we can centralize a cause and hypothesize a solution. "Out of the void, into your minds...." --Ricky -------
mwm@ea.UUCP (04/19/84)
#R:sri-arpa:-1210300:ea:7100010:000:664
ea!mwm Apr 19 14:03:00 1984
/***** ea:net.micro / amd70!phil / 8:06 am Apr 16, 1984 */
There's a difference between the authors of books and the authors
of software: the former don't have to provide support. That makes
software more expensive, by a non-trival amount.
--
Phil Ngai (408) 988-7777 {ucbvax,decwrl,ihnp4,allegra,intelca}!amd70!phil
/* ---------- */
Software authors don't HAVE to provide support. I think doing so is a
plus for the author, in that he gets bug reports, which means he can
market a better product. Of course, if your software & documentation
are perfect (HAH!), then you don't gain by providing support. Then again,
you won't have to provide support.
<mikeriber@uicsl.UUCP (04/20/84)
#R:sri-arpa:-1207300:uicsl:7000060:000:865 uicsl!riber Apr 20 10:50:00 1984 I do not see anything wrong or illegal in bartering for software or any other computer related products. It is hard enough trying to get your moneys worth in the present market. It is not illegal to read a book and then pass it on or trade it to a friend for one of his books. The same goes for any other product. You only break the law if you sell or barter copies or retain a illegal copy for your own use. Granted, it is difficult to enforce the laws on copyrights, but the laws are fair. It is irresponsible to automatically assume that any trade of software envolves illegal copying or any other illegal act. THIS IS THE U.S.A As mentioned in other notes. Innocents until proven otherwise. However suggestions that you are a lawbreaker with out proof can not be condoned.Some people could take offense. Rick Berry pur-ee!uiucdcs!uicsl!riber
riber@uicsl.UUCP (04/20/84)
#R:sri-arpa:-1210300:uicsl:7000061:000:610
uicsl!riber Apr 20 11:15:00 1984
Very few software authors really provide any support of thier
programs. This can be seen in many advertisements and instruction
packages that display the - sold as is - disclaimers. The Majority
of programs put out are collections of a set technic. Granted,
there is a talent involved, but the wages asked for are in my
opinion, very out of line. It takes more talent to write a novel
of any value. And a novelist has no garentees of success either.
Rick Berry
pur-ee!uiucdcs!uicsl!riber
p.s. fortunately there are some excellent software available
from good honest hardworking programmers.JOSEPH@RUTGERS.ARPA (04/25/84)
I am joining this discussion a bit late, but I have an item that I would like to bring to light. One of the biggest reasons why schools don't teach Johnny not to steal software is that schools themselves present a large piracy problem. Usually a school district lays aside money for hardware, say 6 personal computers. In less enlightened districts (read: mostplaces, USA) The software and application of these computers are left up to the individual schools or worse, the individual teachers. Now these folk with miniscule budgets have to make a good showing so that the school board doesn't conclude that teaching computer skills is a waste of money. What do they do? Well, in my experience, they search around trying to find the application or language that would best serve their students and then are brought up short by learning that they will have to buy 6 of them at $200 a crack. And they don't dare give the originals to the students anyway, they would have to buy dozens of them every year to make up for lost/stolen/crashed disks. The alternative, buy one and make copies. This is the most often chosen alternative. Most software companies are not set up for a legal alternative like inexpensive multi CPU licensing of Microcomputer software for educational institutions with backups at cost. How can educators teach Johnny not to pirate software when all his educational software at school is pirated! Another large group of copywrite infringers are large corporations. Many companies put in hundreds of personal computer workstations only to find out that they are going to have to buy hundreds of copies of Lotus 1-2-3 to run on them. A popular but illegal solution here too is to go underground and make copies. Not wholesale like buying one copy of Lotus and making 99 copies but more like, buying 50 and using backups on half of the systems. Economically desireable but wrong. There, I said my piece. I get tired of seeing piracy discussions that only focus on teenage "hoodlums" or hard core pirates. There is an amazing amount of revenue lost even in the more respectible worlds of business and education. -------
bob@plus5.UUCP (Robert E. Simpson) (04/27/84)
[ News from Rivendell and the Shire, and points west]
People seem to be looking for 'reasons' folks pirate software.
Well...
I worked in a two game stores (Fantasy, Science-fiction,
Historical, Role-playing, Board games, Miniatures, etc.) here in
St. Louis for about 4 years. Both had a computer for use by
employees/employees. They both sold time on the machine for
customer use (mostly game playing).
In no time at all, we were getting HORDES of people
wanting to either trade games with us, or use the shop as a
central (their term) 'pirate cove'. Almost all of them were
late grade school/early high school, and had their own
computers, were using the computer at home, or were using the
computer at school. These kids were supposedly supervised and
had, at the very least, tacit approval of whoever was monitoring
their activities.
Almost all of the adults who stole software used the
copies until they either decided they liked the product, and
subsequently bought it, or or decided they didn't like the
product, and erased the media.
Although this last use is still theft, I for one find it
acceptable in a software market that I have found to be hostile
to consumers.
I have had more than one bad experience with
unfriendly/braindamaged retailers, and truly horrendous
documentation/manuals. There are very few companies whose
software I would buy based on publicity blurbs and a quick demo
in some non-descript computer shop. This is all you are likely
to get in the way of reviewing software. (Anybody out there
with a contrary experience?)
I have yet to find a dealer who wants you sitting around
the showroom 'playing' with the software. No dealer wants to let
you take a sample home to test drive. They all seem to think,
and possibly rightly so, that you only want to copy their software.
I realise this is rather rambling, >>sigh<<, but you asked.
---
~bj
Plus Five Computer Services ...!ihnp4!plus5!bob
765 Westwood Dr.
St. Louis, MO 63105 314-725-9492
[ Copyright 1984 Bob Simpson ]
_________________________________________________________________________
| All opinions expressed in this article should be |
| considered the opinion of the author and not necessarily the |
| views of Plus Five Computer Services or its employees. |
_________________________________________________________________________azia@utzoo.UUCP (Anton J Aylward A/S) (05/03/84)
The Honour system seems to reflect local cultural varaitions, and history. In England I grew used to seeing newspapars on sale with an OPEN money-box. I see them here in Canada, too, but not in the big cities. There does seem to be 'Honour system' for SOME software. Some companies will send you a demo-disk. There is another level to the piracy issue: the cost. Suppose you are a university professor writing a textbook on your subject. You have invested somthing like 10 years in getting to know the subject, another X years on the text and so on. You have cross-referenced with articles and papers. If you screw-up, make ridiculous assertions, or mangle a reference you get laughed at and you book fails to become a standard reference. (Unless you take a very Fun-damn-mentalist approach and are willing to settle for it only being sold in Texas :-)) How much will the book sell for ? Between $30 and $90 probably. What are the production costs ? A friend in the industry tells me this can vary from about 10% to about 30% of retail for textbooks. Distributor mark-up is around 30-40%. Marketing costs are lower than "popular" books. So what does a software package that takes about the same effort to produce cost ? Anywhere from $100 to $1400. How well researched is it ? How well cross-referenced ? Would you stake your professional reputation for the rest of your life on the XYZ compiler or word-processor you wrote for the PC ? Judge by the textbooks you see and the programmes you use. I am very against piracy. I work for an information supplier and distributor; software and support text is my livelyhood. However, I think the marketplace is VERY unbalanced, and until people as individuals feel that the software they buy is worth ten times that of another product with higher costs, there will be piracy. In the mean time, I am glad of UNIX(tm) and the network, and that I have an employer who supplies these things. /anton aylward
rbt@sftig.UUCP (R.Thomas) (04/08/85)
> I read in a current medical journal (my wife is a doctor) that someone > had come up with a clever solution to piracy... They give out software for > free, and urge that it be distributed.. The rider is that the software > contains a header notice inviting all users to contribute to the development > of additional software (if they liked the product) by making a charitable > donation to the developers of the software... > Frankly, I strongly suspect that most receivers of under-the-counter software > would be glad to contribute to the developers but don't have any reasonable > way of doing it. However, most people hate parting with cash too.... > Overall, this seems like a risky venture but probably no riskier than any other > distribution method. As said earlier I market bridge and cribbage software > for the P.C. and my advertising is current over $1,000 for 7 small lines in > the blue book of P.C. for 6 issues.. That alone has put me out of business > since sales are at around 100 copies. > If anyone likes the above copy-protection idea send mail to me.. > I don't read net.games as much as I should.... all work and no play... To: watmath!watdaisy!ijdavis Subject: Re: Software Piracy In-reply-to: your article <7171@watdaisy.UUCP> The distribution technique you describe is sometimes called 'share-ware' and I have seen a few things distributed that way. I like the idea very much. Usually, the appeal for contributions includes a promise of some kind of support for those who send in their money. To further sweeten the pot, I have heard of at a variation on the 'support' theme in which you send in your money along with a copy of the diskette you are using. The author will send it back with the 'latest' version and a 'unique serial number' electronically encoded. (A time and date stamp would do fine for a serial number). The person who owns the serial number on the disk you sent in then gets a cut from your contribution. Anybody you give a copy of your own diskette to who sends in his contribution will wind up paying you a 'sales commission' just like you paid the person who owned the copy you sent in. The beauty of this scheme is that pirates make *no* money from it. They actually wind up *helping* the authors and legitimate users to get their fair share by providing the widest possible distribution. The biggest problem (assuming that you have a quality product, that will sell itself to anyone who gets to play with it for a while.) is getting a wide enough initial distribution. Net.sources doesn't seem to be the ideal method (very likely flames from people on the net about commercial use of the medium, etc.) Maybe a short note in net.general and net.wanted describing the 'product' and offering to send a (free) copy of your shareware for evaluation to people who mail you a stamped self addressed floppy. The users on other bulletin board systems may not be so touchy as the netnews folks. Maybe the 'private' BBS's are the right way to get something like this started. Rick Thomas ihnp4!attunix!rbt