[comp.virus] Copy Protection on AIDS Diskette

jmolini@nasamail.nasa.gov (JAMES E. MOLINI) (02/13/90)

About the AIDS Trojan disk, Ian Fahrquar writes:

> This is not a trojan: it is a COPY PROTECTION SYSTEM.  The
> consequences of using the program without paying are quite adequately
> laid out in the license, which apparently has not been read.  It warns
> quite clearly that:
>
> a)   You should not install this program unless you are going to
>     pay for it.
>
> b)   The program contains mechanisms that will ensure that the
>     terms of this license agreement will be followed.
>
> c)   That these mechanisms will affect other programs on the hard
>     disk.

> I am led to make the following conclusions:

> 1.   That all of the users who were adversely affected by this
>     supposed trojan either (a) did not read the license
>     agreement for the program which they were installing, or (b)
>     they read it and ignored it.  Either way, they must accept
>     the consequences.  The installation instructions first step
>     tells you to read the agreement on the reverse of the sheet.
..
> If the author of this program is convicted, it will be the first
> conviction ever for the hidious crime of writing a copy protection
> system, and will be one of the biggest farces of justice ever
> witnessed.

Although I am not a lawyer (Thank God) I can say that the PC Cyborg
license agreement is inherently flawed.  It is the old principle of
"My privilege to swing my fist stops at the end of your nose."

Although the program could have erased itself and called the user all
sorts of nasty names, it had no right to hold his hard disk hostage.
Even if I notify you that I will burn down your business if you fail
to pay off the money you owe me, it still does not cause my action to
become suddenly legal.  That is why we have a court system and
thousands of over employed lawyers today.  You are supposed to settle
contract disputes in court, not with a high tech version of vigilante
justice.

The end result of all this is that the user was not EXPLICITLY made
aware of the absolutely catastrophic consequences of his/her actions.
As some of us have seen in the past, hiding things in fine print and
obscure wording is often sufficient reason to show that the signer did
not know what he was signing.

If you don't believe me, call a lawyer and ask him if he would
represent you on a contingency fee basis (you don't pay unless he
wins) for something like this.

And speaking of wasting someone's time.  Maybe we'd all bettter stop
trying to be what we aren't and concentrate on being a little better
at bug hunting and virus busting.  I will if you will.

Jim Molini