RAFAEL@osu-20.ircc.ohio-state.edu (Rafael Yu) (09/19/90)
Hey, I just got my copy of Rastan GS today from Software Plus, and it is
great. If you think Task Force was good, wait until you see Rastan. It
incorporates great stereo sound effects, music and graphics. It is a true
image of the arcade game. I'm really glad that software companies like Taito,
still support the GS line. I hope Taito will import more games to the GS line,
I will one of the first one on buying them. (eg. IBM's versions of Shy Shrak,
Rambo II, etc)
Now, the only down side on this program is the lack of a QUIT option. The
manual don't metion anythink about it and the usual control-Q or OA-Q don't
do anything. So the only way to exit the game is by doing a control reset.
Also, the copy protection is disturbing. I try to put the game on my hard
drive but no use. Now, I don't want to start another piracy dilema here, but
why bother on copy protection if sooner or later someone will crack it. Now,
many companies argue that copy protection slow down piracy, but I have seen
programs, that are suppose to be copy protected, hit pirate BBS before they
even get on the shelf. So, the only people really hurt by copy protection are
people like me who buy their share on the softwares market but cannot even put
what they buy into their own hard drive. Now, paying an extra fee for a none
copy protected version is not right. You first spend $30+ for a program to
then pay $10+ extra for the same software so you can put it on a Hard Disk,
come on don't explote the consumer.
If softwares companies believe copy protection is really (REALLY) necessary,
why not use a off disk copy protection where the program ask for a code so the
program can be run such as in Bubble Ghost and Man Hunter.
Rafael Yu
============================================================================
America Online: Veraguas
Internet: RAFAEL@osu20.ircc.ohio-state.edu
============================================================================kreme@nyx.UUCP (Finnegan's wake-up call) (09/20/90)
In article <12623071370006@osu-20.ircc.ohio-state.edu> RAFAEL@osu-20.ircc.ohio-state.edu (Rafael Yu) writes: > > > Hey, I just got my copy of Rastan GS today from Software Plus, and it is >great. If you think Task Force was good, wait until you see Rastan. It >incorporates great stereo sound effects, music and graphics. It is a true >image of the arcade game. I'm really glad that software companies like Taito, >still support the GS line. I hope Taito will import more games to the GS line, >I will one of the first one on buying them. (eg. IBM's versions of Shy Shrak, >Rambo II, etc) If people spread the word, get the game into stores and BUY IT! I'm sure that Taito will continue to be producing games for it. Look at Arkanoid II... > Now, the only down side on this program is the lack of a QUIT option. The >manual don't metion anythink about it and the usual control-Q or OA-Q don't >do anything. So the only way to exit the game is by doing a control reset. I thought there was a quit option in the Control Panel... but I could be wrong. Try OA-CTRL-ESC and see if there is one there. >Also, the copy protection is disturbing. I try to put the game on my hard >drive but no use. Now, I don't want to start another piracy dilema here, but >why bother on copy protection if sooner or later someone will crack it. I ordered my copy when I heard it was being released. I haven't gotten it yet. It was on the boards in THREE DAYS. The pirate version is not, as yet, fully cracked. The game can still not be run off the Hard drive... Too bad. > Now, >many companies argue that copy protection slow down piracy, but I have seen >programs, that are suppose to be copy protected, hit pirate BBS before they >even get on the shelf. So, the only people really hurt by copy protection are >people like me who buy their share on the softwares market but cannot even put >what they buy into their own hard drive. Now, paying an extra fee for a none >copy protected version is not right. You first spend $30+ for a program to >then pay $10+ extra for the same software so you can put it on a Hard Disk, >come on don't explote the consumer. Well, as I said, Rastan was available across the country within days. I checked with three stores in the Denver Area and NOT ONE knew that Rastan had beenA released. Not ONE had it on the order list. I told one manager "And you guys have the gall to wonder why so many people buy software through mail order. It's cheaper AND fasster." Hrmph. I have pirate versions of EVERY SINGLE GAME I OWN. And I use them to. The Life and Death version doesn't have the stupid beeper code in it (good thing, I lost the beeper). Prince of Persia is on a 3.5" disk and doesn't require disk switching, etc. Most of the Pirate versions are more usuable than the originals. > If softwares companies believe copy protection is really (REALLY) necessary, >why not use a off disk copy protection where the program ask for a code so the >program can be run such as in Bubble Ghost and Man Hunter. Because it is just as annoying to have to find the damn manual to play a game like Blockout. If I didn;t use the pirate version (with ONE BYTE CHANGED) I would have to look up a color code in the manual to play the game. Now once you know how to play Blockout there is no need to have the manual. line fodder
gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn) (09/21/90)
In article <2114@nyx.UUCP> kreme@nyx.UUCP (Finnegan's wake-up call) writes: >I have pirate versions of EVERY SINGLE GAME I OWN. And I use them to[o]. I don't think there is any justification for encouraging theft. However, I do appreciate information that allows me to adapt these protected games so that I can use them from a hard disk. That's why I subscribe to Computist.
unknown@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (The Unknown User) (09/22/90)
In article <13917@smoke.BRL.MIL> gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn) writes: >In article <2114@nyx.UUCP> kreme@nyx.UUCP (Finnegan's wake-up call) writes: >>I have pirate versions of EVERY SINGLE GAME I OWN. And I use them to[o]. > >I don't think there is any justification for encouraging theft. >However, I do appreciate information that allows me to adapt these >protected games so that I can use them from a hard disk. That's >why I subscribe to Computist. But if he's bought the game, what's wrong with pirating it then? (In a previous message I explained how I feel pirating can be "good" to test ou software, but I won't get into that in more detail here). And please don't give me some lame analogy like "well if I buy one car, then I can steal another".. I don't think that's the same at all. Besides, on the pirated versions you sometimes get crack screens that are more interesting than the games themselves! (heh heh. just kidding.. with the possible exception of Gauntlet GS, my eternal example of GS crudware) -- / Apple II(GS) Forever! unknown@ucscb.ucsc.edu \ \If cartoons were for adults, they'd be on in prime time./
tg.exc@pro-harvest.cts.com (Terry Guelfo) (09/24/90)
In-Reply-To: message from RAFAEL@osu-20.ircc.ohio-state.edu
About piracy and Rastan GS (because it is new): I thought I'd dishearten you
all by telling you it took a mere 72 hours to crack it. The person that did
it started two weeks behind everyone else, yet went a straight 72 hours to do
it. Word also is that John Brooks got ahold of the cracked copy and played it
all the way through. A little background on that last statement. If you try
to play an illegally copied (not cracked) version, an anti-pirate screen will
pop up... randomly, sometime through the game. So, I guess this person that
cracked it did a good job if John was able to play it all the way through.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reardon--Magic with an attitude. Do not walk the metaplanes alone.
Internet: tg.exc@pro-harvest.cts.com |ProLine: tg.exc@pro-harvest
ARPA: crash!pro-harvest!tg.exc@nosc.mil |UUCP: crash!pro-harvest!tg.exc
BITNET: tg.exc%pro-harvest.cts.com@nosc.mil |Knights of the Plex: Reardon
"Hey Horace, there's more drek goin' on out there than you can dig even when
you're hotwired. Y'catch?"
-- From the hit simsense, _Hamlet 2050_, Elan Vital Productions.yk4@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Yong Su Kim) (09/25/90)
It was surprising that the crack was released so soon. Especially after all the messages about how Rastan had an impressive copy protection. Also, there is a cheat out for Rastan. It gives you 9 credits per round, and 9 men per credit, but the 9 men per credit part does not work too well. Rastan is an impressive game. The end animation is not as impressive as the graphics in the game though. I think that the end animation was done by some other artist. The style is different. _____________________________________________________________________________ |Internet: yk4@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu |||||||||||Yong Su Kim|||||||||||| |Bitnet : yk4@cunixc |||||The Korean from Hong Kong|||| |UUCP : uunet!rutgers!columbia!cunixc!yk4 |||||||...Apple IIGS user...|||||| |____________________________________________||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kreme@nyx.UUCP (The Loch Ness Dog) (09/25/90)
In article <13917@smoke.BRL.MIL> gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn) writes: >In article <2114@nyx.UUCP> kreme@nyx.UUCP (Finnegan's wake-up call) writes: >>I have pirate versions of EVERY SINGLE GAME I OWN. And I use them to[o]. > >I don't think there is any justification for encouraging theft. Who's encoraging theft? Did I say I have pirate copies of every game? No. >However, I do appreciate information that allows me to adapt these >protected games so that I can use them from a hard disk. That's >why I subscribe to Computist. Me too. However, the Computist issues usually run about 3-6 months behind the pirates. l i n e f o d d e r
gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn) (09/29/90)
In article <2151@nyx.UUCP> kreme@nyx.UUCP (The Loch Ness Dog) writes: >In article <13917@smoke.BRL.MIL> gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn) writes: >>In article <2114@nyx.UUCP> kreme@nyx.UUCP (Finnegan's wake-up call) writes: >>>I have pirate versions of EVERY SINGLE GAME I OWN. And I use them to[o]. >>I don't think there is any justification for encouraging theft. >Who's encoraging theft? Did I say I have pirate copies of every game? No. I read your posting carefully before responding, now please do the same for mine. I wasn't implying that you personally were a thief, since you stated that you owned the software. However, the pirates that you mention are definitely thieves (or you would be incorrect to call them "pirates"). By making thieves feel appreciated, you're encouraging them in their unethical activities.
kreme@isis.cs.du.edu (Fred Q Zeats IV) (10/07/90)
In article <13958@smoke.BRL.MIL> gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn) writes: >In article <2151@nyx.UUCP> kreme@nyx.UUCP (The Loch Ness Dog) writes: >>In article <13917@smoke.BRL.MIL> gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn) writes: >>>In article <2114@nyx.UUCP> kreme@nyx.UUCP (Finnegan's wake-up call) writes: >>>>I have pirate versions of EVERY SINGLE GAME I OWN. And I use them to[o]. >>>I don't think there is any justification for encouraging theft. >>Who's encoraging theft? Did I say I have pirate copies of every game? No. >I read your posting carefully before responding, now please do the same >for mine. I wasn't implying that you personally were a thief, since you >stated that you owned the software. However, the pirates that you >mention are definitely thieves (or you would be incorrect to call them >"pirates"). By making thieves feel appreciated, you're encouraging them >in their unethical activities. Well, I do not equate the word "pirate" with a thief. A pirate is someone who buys a game and then deprotects it, nothing more, nothing less. The fact that most times deprotected copies of games and utilities are more useful than their protected counterparts should not be a mark against the people de-protecting them, but rather against the companies that use the protection. The only person that is affected by protection is the honest comsumer who is not aware of, or able to get, "pirate" version of the software they own. I encourage "pirate" software because it makes the software I own easier to use. A perfect example is Blockout. The original game is still in it's box. I have the "cracked" version installed on the HD. Another good example is Life and Death, or just about any game. --
rhyde@ucrmath.ucr.edu (randy hyde) (10/08/90)
>> I do not equate the word pirate with thief...
Perhaps you should look up the word "pirate" in the dictionary sometime.
I equate "pirate" with thief.
I do *NOT* equate "hacker" with "good programmer".
Both of these terms have gained a romantic air due to less upstanding
individuals in our society.
BTW, "cracking" a game is definitely illegal based on current copyright laws.
While I agree that protecting a piece of software is only going to hurt the
honest person, software companies are well within their rights to do so.
I don't even consider copy protection immoral. Cracking and pirating are
both immoral and *ILLEGAL* activities. It's amazing to read on this net
one message complaining about lack of support for the GS only to be followed
by a message claiming it's okay to "pirate" software. I would apologize to
you immediately if you could prove you've *paid* for every piece of software
on your system and that you've never given away a cracked piece of software.
However, I would be lying if I claimed *I* never used a piece of pirated
software in my life. But I like to think that I've reformed myself (not that
I was ever big into that kind of stuff). If you don't like some company's
policy concerning copy protection, you have a very powerful weapon to fight
back with: your wallet. Just don't buy the program. OTOH, if you're not
willing to pay for it (and not distribute it once you do pay for it), don't
complain when no one supports the GS anymore...
*** Randy Hyde O-)jh4o+@andrew.cmu.edu (Jeffrey T. Hutzelman) (10/08/90)
rhyde@ucrmath.ucr.edu (randy hyde) writes: >>> I do not equate the word pirate with thief... >Perhaps you should look up the word "pirate" in the dictionary > sometime. > I equate "pirate" with thief. > I do *NOT* equate "hacker" with "good programmer". > > Both of these terms have gained a romantic air due to less upstanding > individuals in our society. Nor do I. However, do not equate "hacker" with "pirate," either. ----------------- Jeffrey Hutzelman America Online: JeffreyH11 Internet/BITNET:jh4o+@andrew.cmu.edu, jhutz@drycas.club.cc.cmu.edu >> Apple // Forever!!! <<
unknown@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (The Unknown User) (10/08/90)
In article <9096@ucrmath.ucr.edu> rhyde@ucrmath.ucr.edu (randy hyde) writes: >I do *NOT* equate "hacker" with "good programmer". Well then I presume you've not been in the computer hobbyist "field" long enough. Hacker has been used for a long time, and was originally a COMPLIMENT. Now it has unfortunately been degraded to mean someone who breaks into systems... At least that's the popular definition. In mail and posting, I still often use the word hacker in its original definition, and add something like ".... hacker (in its original definition, not the current corrupted definition)." Hell, we are trying to fight Apple's lack of support for the Apple II... Why can't I try to fight the murder of a complimentary word? >BTW, "cracking" a game is definitely illegal based on current copyright laws. If I buy a piece of software, I can do anything with it. Or a book, or a record, anything... Books are software for the mind, and records are software for a record player... heh... If I buy something, I can mutilate and wreck it however I want, as long as I don't pass it on and purport it as being mine. I'm not saying I believe in the last paragraph, I just mean that's the law. As I've said many times in the past few weeks, I support piracy as a form of TESTING OUT software. It is technically illegal, but people get a good long amount of time to test out a program and see if they REALLY DO like the software. If they like it, they will buy it.. (as I've also said, I have a big queue of programs to buy.. some by companies that have gone out of business but I'm still going to find a copy and buy it out of my own principles). If people don't like it, it doesn't get bought, the company either gets out of the market (bad idea if it's the GS market but still) or makes better products. Simple economics. -- / Apple II(GS) Forever! unknown@ucscb.ucsc.edu \ \"If cartoons were meant for adults, they'd be on in prime time."-Lisa Simpson/
fadden@cory.Berkeley.EDU (Andy McFadden) (10/08/90)
In article <7586@darkstar.ucsc.edu> unknown@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (The Unknown User) writes: >In article <9096@ucrmath.ucr.edu> rhyde@ucrmath.ucr.edu (randy hyde) writes: >>I do *NOT* equate "hacker" with "good programmer". > Well then I presume you've not been in the computer hobbyist >"field" long enough. I don't believe I just read that. [stuff about "hacker" removed ... consult the Official Jargon file] >>BTW, "cracking" a game is definitely illegal based on current copyright laws. > If I buy a piece of software, I can do anything with it. Or a book, >or a record, anything... Books are software for the mind, and records are >software for a record player... heh... You are purchasing the media. You are (in most cases) merely getting a license from the software company to run the software on your machine. Therefore you may mutilate the disk, but CANNOT alter the program. Modifying the words in a book or the music on a record really doesn't have much meaning. However, I suggest you check out laws regarding "derivative works", and that you not listen to a word I'm saying since I'm not a lawyer. >/ Apple II(GS) Forever! unknown@ucscb.ucsc.edu \ >\"If cartoons were meant for adults, they'd be on in prime time."-Lisa Simpson/ -- fadden@cory.berkeley.edu (Andy McFadden) ..!ucbvax!cory!fadden
jb10320@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Desdinova) (10/08/90)
In article <28560@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> fadden@cory.Berkeley.EDU writes: >In article <7586@darkstar.ucsc.edu> unknown@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (The Unknown User) writes: >>In article <9096@ucrmath.ucr.edu> rhyde@ucrmath.ucr.edu (randy hyde) writes: >>>I do *NOT* equate "hacker" with "good programmer". >> Well then I presume you've not been in the computer hobbyist >>"field" long enough. > >I don't believe I just read that. > >[stuff about "hacker" removed ... consult the Official Jargon file] > >>>BTW, "cracking" a game is definitely illegal based on current copyright laws. >> If I buy a piece of software, I can do anything with it. Or a book, >>or a record, anything... Books are software for the mind, and records are >>software for a record player... heh... > >You are purchasing the media. You are (in most cases) merely getting a >license from the software company to run the software on your machine. >Therefore you may mutilate the disk, but CANNOT alter the program. WRONG. Shrink-wrap liscencing is not enforceable under the federal Copyright laws. And modification of software which you have bought is 100% LEGAL as long as the deviant copies are destroyed if a transfer of ownership. Also, it is perfectly legal to modify software so as to obtain your legally protected rights to have backup copies of the software. I went through all this before with you folks, but it looks like I'll have to post the copyright law here again for all to see. >Modifying the words in a book or the music on a record really doesn't have >much meaning. However, I suggest you check out laws regarding "derivative >works", and that you not listen to a word I'm saying since I'm not a lawyer. I'm trying NOT to listen to a word you're saying :-). Really, you can do anything you like to software you've bought so long as 1) you didn't sign a legal contract (shrink-wrap does not count) 2) you don't distribute copies >>/ Apple II(GS) Forever! unknown@ucscb.ucsc.edu \ Amen >fadden@cory.berkeley.edu (Andy McFadden) >..!ucbvax!cory!fadden -- Jawaid Bazyar | Blondes in big black cars look better wearing Senior/Computer Engineering | their dark sunglasses at night. (unk. wierdo) jb10320@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu | The gin, the gin, glows in the Dark! | (B O'Cult) Apple II Users Unite! Storm the New Product Announcement and Demand Justice!
alfter@uns-helios.nevada.edu (SCOTT ALFTER) (10/08/90)
In article <9096@ucrmath.ucr.edu> rhyde@ucrmath.ucr.edu (randy hyde) writes: >BTW, "cracking" a game is definitely illegal based on current copyright laws. >While I agree that protecting a piece of software is only going to hurt the >honest person, software companies are well within their rights to do so. >I don't even consider copy protection immoral. Cracking and pirating are >[stuff deleted] Ever hear of the "fair use doctrine?" You can make copies for your own use. In fact, the recommended procedure is to copy a new program when you buy it, put the original disk(s) in a safe place, and use the copy. The fair-use doctrine would also cover the installation of a program on a hard disk or RAM disk for faster loading. This is the major argument against copy protection; it's the same argument the MeSsy-DOS folks used to rid their software industry of copy protection. If a software company won't put enough faith in its customers to not use copy protection, you should simply refuse to do business with them; track down a program that will do the same, but isn't copy-protected. Face the facts: copy protection is a losing proposition. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Scott Alfter _/_ / v \ Apple II: Internet: alfter@uns-helios.nevada.edu ( ( the power to be your best! GEnie: S.ALFTER \_^_/
russotto@eng.umd.edu (Matthew T. Russotto) (10/08/90)
In article <9096@ucrmath.ucr.edu> rhyde@ucrmath.ucr.edu (randy hyde) writes: > >BTW, "cracking" a game is definitely illegal based on current copyright laws. Are you a lawyer? (Don't answer that, I've got a flame based on either answer) The way I read the law (and I'm not a lawyer), cracking a game is NOT illegal, though distributing the cracked copy would be as illegal as distributing the uncracked copy. >While I agree that protecting a piece of software is only going to hurt the >honest person, software companies are well within their rights to do so. >I don't even consider copy protection immoral. Cracking and pirating are >both immoral and *ILLEGAL* activities. Why is it immoral to 'crack'--- deprotect --- software? > It's amazing to read on this net >one message complaining about lack of support for the GS only to be followed >by a message claiming it's okay to "pirate" software. Claiming it is ok to use pirate copies of software you have bought. There's quite a difference. >I would apologize to >you immediately if you could prove you've *paid* for every piece of software >on your system and that you've never given away a cracked piece of software. >However, I would be lying if I claimed *I* never used a piece of pirated >software in my life. But I like to think that I've reformed myself (not that >I was ever big into that kind of stuff). If you don't like some company's >policy concerning copy protection, you have a very powerful weapon to fight >back with: your wallet. Just don't buy the program. OTOH, if you're not >willing to pay for it (and not distribute it once you do pay for it), don't >complain when no one supports the GS anymore... Or, you could buy the software anyway, and distribute the instructions for removing the copy protection-- making it irrelevant, and hopefully convincing the company to drop it. -- Matthew T. Russotto russotto@eng.umd.edu russotto@wam.umd.edu .sig under construction, like the rest of this campus.
russotto@eng.umd.edu (Matthew T. Russotto) (10/08/90)
In article <28560@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> fadden@cory.Berkeley.EDU writes: >> If I buy a piece of software, I can do anything with it. Or a book, >>or a record, anything... Books are software for the mind, and records are >>software for a record player... heh... > >You are purchasing the media. You are (in most cases) merely getting a >license from the software company to run the software on your machine. >Therefore you may mutilate the disk, but CANNOT alter the program. Phbbbttttt. There was a little seal there, and it said 'breaking this seal constitutes agreement to the terms of the license agreement. I cut open the bottom of the package, leaving the seal intact. Therefore, I claim the license is irrelevant. >Modifying the words in a book or the music on a record really doesn't have >much meaning. However, I suggest you check out laws regarding "derivative >works", and that you not listen to a word I'm saying since I'm not a lawyer. If it was 'definitely illegal', magazines like Computist would have been sued successfully for conspiracy... -- Matthew T. Russotto russotto@eng.umd.edu russotto@wam.umd.edu .sig under construction, like the rest of this campus.
rhyde@ucrmath.ucr.edu (randy hyde) (10/08/90)
>> I presume you've not been in the computer hobbyist "field" long enough.
Perhaps you're right. I was only 10 years old in the middle 60s when the
term was coined. However, from your statements, I assume *YOU* haven't
been around long enough to know where the term was derived from. "Hack"
means exactly that, someone who hacks away at something till they get it
working. The term "hack writer" was in existence long before there were
computers, much less computer hobbyists. The term "computer hacker" came
about because there were lots of people playing around on computers, learning
how to program them, without any formal training. Sure, they got a lot
of stuff to actually work, even some marvelous stuff, but their methods
were generally poor. Hackers gained a lot of romantic infamy by writing
video games (Steve Levy's book didn't hurt, either) and other high visibility
programs (e.g., the GNU stuff). Media stories of 16 year olds making six
figure salaries helped propogate the attention [I personally knew some
16-year olds who were making six figure salaries, it was a bunch of media
hype, this one character got a $25,000 quarterly royalty check; once.
Multiply that by four and you've got a six figure salary. Of course, the
next quarter's check was only $5,000 and the game stopped selling after
that).
Then a new breed of "hackers" developed-- the ones who caused problems and
were breaking into systems, spreading viruses, and setting up pirate networks.
They called themselves hackers (because, by then, this had a romantic
meaning). Indeed they were-- They had very little formal training and they
were busy solving problems via trial and error (almost the definition of
a hacker). Unlike their predecessors, these guys (and gals) were often
little more than common criminals.
So while I feel sorry for those who mistakenly choose the term "hacker"
as a badge of honor, only to have the term bastardized by some low-lifes,
I'm quite happy to see that, once again, the term is developing negative
connotations.
*** Randy Hyderhyde@ucrmath.ucr.edu (randy hyde) (10/08/90)
>>> If I buy a piece of software I can do anything with it...books...records.
You cannot copy a book, in entirety, even for your own use (legally, anyway).
You cannot copy a record (legally). Most people are under the mistaken
opinion you can freely copy a record (or CD) to a cassette tape to use
in your car. *WRONG* I had the riot act on this one read to me by an
old partner of mine who was in the music industry (he "discovered"
Survivor, Edgar Winter, and a couple of other groups). You seem to have
some strong opinions about what's legal and not legal. I suggest you
study the copyright laws carefully before posting such messages in the future.
All you're managing to do is make people on the net take you less seriously.
BTW, shrink wrap licenses may or may not be enforcable. However, until they
are struck down, *YOU* have to assume they are legally binding.
I could almost agree with you that piracy, as a means of evaluating software
is moral (although certainly not legal). However, most people I've talked
to haven't gone ahead and purchased the software after "testing" it. Look
at how poorly shareware is doing. Furthermore, commercial software is
*NOT* shareware. You don't have the legal right to try it before you buy it.
If you want a test drive, that's what dealers are for. Find a good dealer
which will have a demo copy you can play with in the store. Otherwise,
only use shareware, only buy software with a 30-day money back guarantee
(there are mail order houses which provide this service), or don't use the
software at all.
*** Randy Hyde O-)gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn) (10/08/90)
In article <7586@darkstar.ucsc.edu> unknown@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (The Unknown User) writes: >Hacker has been used for a long time, and was originally a COMPLIMENT. No, while "hacking" wasn't synonymous with "cracking" (a more recent term introduced in an attempt to prevent "hacking" from being given a bad name), it wasn't necessarily a compliment, but rather just descriptive of a certain type of activity. In my decades of computing I've been involved both in hacking and in software engineering. The connotations of the term "hacking" included exploration of computing systems to see what they are capable of, as well as a subfield consisting of finding ways to access other systems on the ARPAnet in order to explore them, too. The latter subfield is now in general disrepute, due to abuse by a small number of "crackers" who had a distinct lack of ethics, not to mention lack of common sense. "Hacking" has always implied a rather undisciplined approach to computing, which may partly explain the origin of the name. There have always been those who would not have considered being called a "hacker" a compliment.
MQUINN@UTCVM.BITNET (10/08/90)
>Cracking and pirating are both immoral and *ILLEGAL* activities. I dissagree with the 'cracking' part, but I agree with the 'pirating' part. If I pay $30+ for a game, and it's protected, I'm going to do whatever I can to put it on my HD. I paid for it, as long as I don't use it on two comuters at the same time or give a copy away, then I can't see ANYTHING wrong with it. I'm just modifying it to better suit my needs. It's like buying a car and the manufacturer says I can't change anything with it once I buy it. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | | This is your brain... | BITNET-- mquinn@utcvm | | This is your brain on drugs... | pro-line: | | This is your brain on whole wheat.| mquinn@pro-gsplus.cts.com | |____________________________________|_______________________________|
seah@ee.rochester.edu (David Seah) (10/09/90)
In article <7586@darkstar.ucsc.edu> unknown@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (The Unknown User) writes: >In article <9096@ucrmath.ucr.edu> rhyde@ucrmath.ucr.edu (randy hyde) writes: >> >>I do *NOT* equate "hacker" with "good programmer". > > Well then I presume you've not been in the computer hobbyist >"field" long enough. Hacker has been used for a long time, and was >originally a COMPLIMENT. Now it has unfortunately been degraded to mean >someone who breaks into systems... At least that's the popular definition. ..And we owe it all to WarGames :( There has traditionally been a tension between "professional programmers" and hackers. As the computer science field matured and entered a "paradigm" stage, the exploratory nature of hackers began to be resented by the new order of professionals. "They waste time mucking around the system!", "They have no discipline!", "They have no former training!" were common cries. The hackers, on the other hand, considered the professionals to be "dull", "stiff programmers", and "uninspired". The professionals continued to see the hackers as a threat because, quite frankly, they knew what they were doing and understood the system on an almost intuitive level. Nothing pricks more than to have one of the "unwashed" saunter in and fix bugs in the "pros" code like he was picking his teeth. The hackers saw the professionals as a threat to the "fun" of computer programming. The death of innovation! The restiction of information! No good. Of interest is the hint that there are different personality types between hackers and professionals. If you apply tests like the Myers- Brigg Type Indicator, a differentiation test, and something called the Remote Associates test, you can just about pick out who is the Hacker and who is the Professional. -- Dave Seah | Omnidyne Systems-M | INET: seah@ee.rochester.edu | | "User-Friendly Killing Machines" | America Online: AFC DaveS | ^..^ +-----------------------------------------------------------------+
greg@hoss.unl.edu (Hammer) (10/10/90)
... russotto@eng.umd.edu (Matthew T. Russotto) writes: >... rhyde@ucrmath.ucr.edu (randy hyde) writes: >> >>BTW, "cracking" a game is definitely illegal based on current copyright laws. >Are you a lawyer? (Don't answer that, I've got a flame based on either >answer) The way I read the law (and I'm not a lawyer), cracking a game is NOT >illegal, though distributing the cracked copy would be as illegal as >distributing the uncracked copy. Also, if cracking a game is illegal, how would you explain the (HD) parameters found on Copy II Plus? They are specifically designed to remove copy protection for installation to your hard drive. Distribution of said game (or uncracked, just copied) would be illegal, and in that sense the term "pirate" would come into play. Someone who buys the program and uses it for their own use (let's not get into the "one machine" stuff right now) deprotected and installed on their HD is not in violation of the law. >>While I agree that protecting a piece of software is only going to hurt the >>honest person, software companies are well within their rights to do so. >>I don't even consider copy protection immoral. Cracking and pirating are >>both immoral and *ILLEGAL* activities. >Why is it immoral to 'crack'--- deprotect --- software? I don't believe it is. Distributing the cracked copy would be. >> It's amazing to read on this net >>one message complaining about lack of support for the GS only to be followed >>by a message claiming it's okay to "pirate" software. Not to pirate, but to crack legal copies for own use, or use pirate copies of something you already legally own. (However the use of pirated software from another source isn't wise anyway, since some unscrupulous person may add a third step: crack -> infect -> distribute.) >>I would apologize to >>you immediately if you could prove you've *paid* for every piece of software >>on your system and that you've never given away a cracked piece of software. This may be the first thing you've said right. You've basically said that what everyone has been trying to "crowbar into your cranium" is legal. It's just that your messages seem to state the opposite to what you just said right there, and thus you've been getting flamage. (Unless you mistyped here.) >Or, you could buy the software anyway, and distribute the instructions for >removing the copy protection-- making it irrelevant, and hopefully convincing >the company to drop it. Instructions for cp removal are legal (hence the publications and programs that are legal being legal) to distribute. The resulting software from usage of the parameters being distributed is illegal. The originals become your archive copies, and your unprotected version becomes your usage copy. >-- >Matthew T. Russotto russotto@eng.umd.edu russotto@wam.umd.edu > .sig under construction, like the rest of this campus. Note: "crowbar into your cranium" comes from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, by Douglas Adams, said by character Zaphod Beeblebrox (paraphrased). -- __ _____________ __ \ \_\ \__ __/ /_/ / "The Law: No Jumping" \greg@hoss.unl.edu/ "Why not? <jump> <jump> <blam>" \_\ \_\|_|/_/ /_/ "That's why." --I, Robot
zane@ddsw1.MCS.COM (Sameer Parekh) (10/10/90)
Y_1Mk3wE&y!pm_sJ{(M&m1c2<'=3
o4CdIn article <1990Oct8.060653.6435@eng.umd.edu> russotto@eng.umd.edu (Matthew T. Russotto) writes:
>Why is it immoral to 'crack'--- deprotect --- software?
Yes, I agree, I do NOT think it is immoral to say, buy a program, and then
d/l a cracked version from a local bulletin board so that you may put it
on your hard drive. (I dunno if it is legal, though)
--
Sameer Parekh :-) | "Censorship is the worst crime ever commited"
zane@ddsw1.MCS.COM | -Sameer Parekh
Censors should be shot, | "If cartoons were meant for adults they'd be shown
hung, and quartered! | on prime time" --Lisa Simpsontg.exc@pro-harvest.cts.com (Terry Guelfo) (10/10/90)
In-Reply-To: message from rhyde@ucrmath.ucr.edu >Cracking a game is definitely illegal based on current copyright laws. Depends. Every software manual I own says it is LEGAL for me to make one back up copy for my own personal use. Well, if the damn thing has copy protection on it, you're just going to have to find a way to take it off so you CAN make a backup. I also think that this practice of putting hideous copy protection on a disk which hampers putting the software on a harddrive is ridiculous. If I purchase it, I just might want to put it on a haddrive. I BOUGHT the darn thing, so I should automatically have that right. >Both of these terms [pirate and hacker] have gained a romantic air due to less upstanding citizens in our society. Me, I say "no comment." But, I might add, expect a LOT of flames in your mailbox. Just a friendly warning. I am sure you will get some. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Reardon--Magic with an attitude. Do not walk the metaplanes alone. Internet: tg.exc@pro-harvest.cts.com |ProLine: tg.exc@pro-harvest ARPA: crash!pro-harvest!tg.exc@nosc.mil |UUCP: crash!pro-harvest!tg.exc BITNET: tg.exc%pro-harvest.cts.com@nosc.mil |Knights of the Plex: Reardon "Hey Horace, there's more drek goin' on out there than you can dig even when you're hotwired. Y'catch?" -- From the hit simsense, _Hamlet 2050_, Elan Vital Productions.
tg.exc@pro-harvest.cts.com (Terry Guelfo) (10/10/90)
In-Reply-To: message from unknown@ucscb.UCSC.EDU
>I support piracy as a form of TESTING OUT software.
I agree with you. However, not so many of the people out there are that
honest about it, and that is where you run into problems.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reardon--Magic with an attitude. Do not walk the metaplanes alone.
Internet: tg.exc@pro-harvest.cts.com |ProLine: tg.exc@pro-harvest
ARPA: crash!pro-harvest!tg.exc@nosc.mil |UUCP: crash!pro-harvest!tg.exc
BITNET: tg.exc%pro-harvest.cts.com@nosc.mil |Knights of the Plex: Reardon
"Hey Horace, there's more drek goin' on out there than you can dig even when
you're hotwired. Y'catch?"
-- From the hit simsense, _Hamlet 2050_, Elan Vital Productions.philip@utstat.uucp (Philip McDunnough) (10/20/90)
In article <4907@crash.cts.com> tg.exc@pro-harvest.cts.com (Terry Guelfo) writes: >In-Reply-To: message from unknown@ucscb.UCSC.EDU > >>I support piracy as a form of TESTING OUT software. > >I agree with you. However, not so many of the people out there are that >honest about it, and that is where you run into problems. Don't get carried away. While the pirate world does provide a person with information about what is out there, it also has a very detrimental effect on relatively small user bases like the GS one. Perhaps one solution might be to allow legal owners of software the chance to purchase( for a small fee) a totally unprotected version of a piece of software, after a certain time frame has passed. It also wouldn't hurt if users bought software from those companies which produce quality products, and simply ignored those companies which tend to consistently produce junk. Philip McDunnough University of Toronto->philip@utstat.toronto.edu [my opinions]
bchurch@oucsace.cs.OHIOU.EDU (Bob Church) (10/21/90)
>In article <4907@crash.cts.com> tg.exc@pro-harvest.cts.com (Terry Guelfo) writes: >>In-Reply-To: message from unknown@ucscb.UCSC.EDU >> >>>I support piracy as a form of TESTING OUT software. >> >>I agree with you. However, not so many of the people out there are that >>honest about it, and that is where you run into problems. > I disagree with testing out pirated software but not for the reasons you would think. A good software writer puts a lot of energy into software *and* manual. Most packages include tips and even customer support to help their customers. You have no idea of the integrity of the game that you receive from a pirate board, etc. Maybe you don't like the game because it is too hard or too easy to progress from level to level. Is this inherent in the game or just because of a bad copy? Appleworks is one of the most slandered programs I have seen. I knew of a University employee who tested a copy that had been given to him. He spread the word that Appleworks was useless because you couldn't even do block moves with it. He turned an entire department against Appleworks because of several essential things that it didn't do. When I showed him in my manual how simple it was to do these things it was the classic "never mind". The damage had already been done though. How do you protect yourself from buying bad software? Well, if I knew the answer to that one I wouldn't have a bookcase full of stuff that I don't use. It would be nice to find a magazine that gave impartial reviews. The ones in Nibble used to be an insult to the intelligence. We need someone who will write reviews without worrying so much about upsetting their advertisers. Anyway, to get back to my original point, I have found that the person who gets cheated the most by using pirated software is yourself. bob church bchurch.oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu
unknown@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (The Unknown User) (10/21/90)
In article <1990Oct20.073921.423@utstat.uucp> philip@utstat.uucp (Philip McDunnough) writes: >In article <4907@crash.cts.com> tg.exc@pro-harvest.cts.com (Terry Guelfo) writes: >>In-Reply-To: message from unknown@ucscb.UCSC.EDU >> >>>I support piracy as a form of TESTING OUT software. >> >>I agree with you. However, not so many of the people out there are that >>honest about it, and that is where you run into problems. >Don't get carried away. While the pirate world does provide a person with >information about what is out there, it also has a very detrimental effect >on relatively small user bases like the GS one. > >Perhaps one solution might be to allow legal owners of software the chance >to purchase( for a small fee) a totally unprotected version of a piece of >software, after a certain time frame has passed. Lots of companies already do this and it's a ripoff. Make people may MORE MONEY for something WITHOUT protection?!?! I mean they should get an unprotected program from the beginning! {Just as an aside, I don't see how gas stations charge MORE for unleaded gas when they have to do LESS to it from what I know.. lead is ADDED to make "regular" gas right?! So charge MORE for NOT adding lead... boy.. odd} >It also wouldn't hurt if users bought software from those companies which >produce quality products, and simply ignored those companies which tend to >consistently produce junk. That's exactly what I'm going to do when I make enough money.. (And even if companies are out of business I'll still try to find and buy a copy, specifically Alien Mind I'm thinking about.. It's basically the principle of the thing).. Arkanoid I, II, CrystalQuest, Xenocide, Rastan and a few others are what I plan to buy. (I'd buy ShufflePuck GS if they put it out! Now I --have-- to pirate it!) But like the makers of Gauntlet GS.. Whoopie.. I still have it on a disk somewhere.. it's not like I use it... it's crap... SO I should have to pay for it to find that out? They should almost be shot for putting out such crap in the first place. (Obviously I'm not completely literally serious on this... although it might make better software be written!! heh heh heh).. -- / Apple II(GS) Forever! unknown@ucscb.ucsc.edu \ \"If cartoons were meant for adults, they'd be on in prime time."-Lisa Simpson/