peraino@gmuvax2.gmu.edu (Bob Peraino) (02/01/91)
>From: sburke@jarthur.Claremont.EDU (Scott Burke) >I have a few thoughts on this beginning thread on ROM copying. In fact, >being a commercial developer with Sparcom, I have thought about it a _lot_. I'm going to play devil's advocate here: >1. You don't need to back up ROM cards. Ever. Therefore code that is > designed to extract a library object from a ROM card is not excusable > as a backup device. I disagree. If I buy software, I don't OWN the software; I am licensed to use it. What if I damage/lose/suffer theft of the application card? Are you telling me I automatically lose the license I paid for? This isn't how most software vending works. The only difference between most software and the applications cards is the media. The courts have already ruled that I have the right to copy my software for archival. So legally, I can copy those ROMS for my own backup purposes if I wish, and I listed three reasons why I might want to do that. >2. Earlier, someone posted and asked for that code because they only wanted > _part_ of the EQLIB card, but not all of it. That, I believe, would be > piracy. Unless of course they own the card, in which case they should > just plug the darn thing in. Even if "they" didn't own the card, it wouldn't be piracy. Technically, it would be 'software creep'. It would only truly be piracy if the copies were being sold. And if "they" owned the card, plugging it in takes a port. I think the original poster meant that he wanted to buy the card, and extract only those pieces he used, so he could save the port. Nothing illegal there. >3. For serious users, the 48SX really is a one-slot machine, because they > must always have a merged 128K or 32K RAM card in one of the ports. This > means that only one commercial ROM card can be used at a time, and that > access to only one set of libraries is provided. All the more reason for the previous paragraph. >4. If libraries are distributed (i.e., sold) as code objects like Donnelly's > Toolkit, which comes on a disk, then they can be downloaded to the 48. > But this eats memory--does anybody out there actually use all his code in > a 32K machine? No, of course not. If you have a 32K machine, you down- > load ... But Donnelly's libraries can be pirated because of this. So what? The possibility of piracy is an accepted fact. He is using a distribution channel that most of the world uses- disks. If EVERYONE put their blasted code on applications cards, NO ONE would buy them, since only two slots are available. >6. If Joe owns two ROM cards, he can pull one out and plug the other one in. > This is simple. There is no need to complain about the 3 seconds taken > to do this if Joe wants to access two different ROM cards, he doesn't > need to extract one of the libraries and put it in RAM. It takes longer than three seconds, and you know it. Especially if like me, you want to be real careful. It potentially can be a real hassle. Besides, what if my application requires TWO 128k cards? Then what do I do? Not buy YOUR software? I'm sure you wouldn't like that. >I really can't come up with a reason other than piracy for the ROM-extraction >code. Reasons above. > I respect the author's desire to break an encryption scheme, and I >believe it is perfectly ok to post the fact that it has been broken. BUT I >must point out (as HP pointed out the author) that posting such code is not >responsible, as there is no need for it. The need is there, as detailed above. Based on the above, I would not call the action "not responsible". >..................................................................Sure, >Sparcom could include software copy protection. We could include hardware >copy protection. And it would be broken. I haven't seen a perfect system yet. > But spending time on such financial protection merely cuts >into the time spent developing intriguing new products for the 48sx. No, it cuts into my wallet, and I won't buy your product. >sburke@jarthur.claremont.edu I started by saying that I was playing devil's advocate. That's because I would not pirate software. On the other hand, I truly believe that I have the right to protect my investment from something as trivial as static discharge. I DO NOT buy software that I cannot personally back up. That doesn't automatically mean I give it away. Hell, if I'm the registered, user, I wouldn't want MY copy floating around. peraino@gmuvax.gmu.edu Systems Analyst Security Administrator (Thought I'd add this so you know I'm serious about software protection).
Jake-S@cup.portal.com (Jake G Schwartz) (02/02/91)
Bob Peraino gives some rather valid (IMHO) arguments for copying ROM cards that a user owns into his own RAM for use with other ROM images that he owns. I'd like to add at least one other point to this argument. In the case of CMT cards, they stipulate in their documentation that the pins on the cards tend to wear over time, and that plugging and unplugging should be kept to a minimum. This is obviously true for the HP cards as well (although I might speculate that HP's cards may be a bit more robust - who really knows for sure?). Therefore, I definitely do not want to be plugging and unplugging my cards every few minutes. If I own 4 32K cards, I think I have a right to have all 4 of them in my machine at once in port 2 while my 128K RAM card is in port one. At the Las Vegas meeting, when the Sparcom folks talked about their Personal Information Manager card, I brought this issue up specifically (and Joe Horn followed it up with some poignant questions to the speakers). I happen to own a Casio 7500 BOSS organizer, which I keep in my pocket just about all the time. When I heard about the "PIM" card from Sparcom, I figured that I could retire the BOSS and keep the data in the HP48 so I wouldnt have to carry two machines around. But the PIM card functions go away when the card is unplugged (except, of course, for the alarms which stay in RAM in the HP48), and I need my port 2 for *all* the ROM cards I own. The Sparcom people had no good solution to this dilemma. I purposely did NOT suggest copying the PIM card into RAM, hoping that they would have a creative solution that I did not think of. They did not, only saying that "we agree, it's a problem." They DID get upset when Joe asked them point blank if they'd have objection to copying the PIM card that one owned , into his RAM, citing copyright problems. Paul Hubbert spoke up at that moment, mentioning that all the PC software vendors (who sell products for far more money than Sparcom cards) all recommend copying their products on to the user's hard drive. Well, my "hard drive" on my HP48 at the moment happens to be a CMT EEPROM card. I see no problems with using it as such, since I bought the ROM cards in the first place. Jake Schwartz