disks, copy prot., etc.

[Info-Mac]

Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 UW 5/3/83; site uw-beaver
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!cbosgd!ihnp4!houxm!houxz!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!info-mac
From: info-mac@uw-beaver (info-mac)
Newsgroups: fa.info-mac
Subject: disks, copy prot., etc.
Message-ID:
Date: Tue, 3-Jul-84 16:32:52 EDT
Article-I.D.: uw-beave.1049
Posted: Tue Jul 3 16:32:52 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 4-Jul-84 23:46:31 EDT
Sender: daemon@uw-beave
Organization: U of Washington Computer Science
Lines: 27

From: Jerry E. Pournelle
One problem with copy protection from publisher view: something
I hadn't thought of before. Philippe Kahn of Borland (Turbo)
points out that few pirate Turbo because the documentation is
needed and not more than a couple of copies per site are used
anyway. With their new "Sidekick" utility (where does Borland
get its ugly names fro great programs) the program is
self-explanatory, no documents are needed--and big companies
will buy one copy, then make fifty copies and internally
distribute. Kahn sells for $50.00 (well, $49.95) a fair price
for a good product; and he's right, there are large outfits that
have bought disk duplicators for internal use...
What should publishers do? Many big companies are
streaight arrow, but some BIG ones are not, and they have
EXPENSIVE lawyers. (Do not suggest that we kill all the lawyers
as solution. The idea has merits, but there are implementation
difficulties).
I've been active in denouncing copy protected software
and in general have not changed my view (at $395.00 and like
that, my sympathes are with the user); but what do we do about
the situation where good programs at reasonable prices are
ripeed off? (Incidentlally, the Borland copy protection scheme
is deliberately unsophistiacted so that hackers will have no
trouble with it; if they crack it they may even get a message
congratulating them; it wasn't his intent to keep hobbyists from
making backup and archive copies...)