Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!att!mtuxo!mtgzz!drutx!druhi!terrell
From: terrell@druhi.ATT.COM (TerrellE)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: Re: Making Piracy work in your Favor
Summary: Making Software Piracy Work in your Favor
Message-ID: <4347@druhi.ATT.COM>
Date: 26 Jun 89 15:32:04 GMT
References: <890625.11081288.023669@SFA.CP6>
Organization: AT&T, Denver, CO
Lines: 79

In article <890625.11081288.023669@SFA.CP6>, Z4648252@SFAUSTIN.BITNET (Z4648252) writes:
> 
>     Terrell made a two-pronged list of how to protect products of
> piracy and how to make piracy advantageous.  His first prong was to
> make sure that the product was one worth having because of its Customer
> Support, Update Announcements, Monthly Newsletters, and decent
> Documentation.  His second prong was to make the product workable
> through piracy by having Customer Support request the user's name/address
> or registration number, etc., and declining support if the user
> cannot supply such or maybe even providing support.  He stated that
> when new releases come out, the pirate will want the latest, thus wanting
> to finally buy, in order that he will get the latest.  He concluded
> with having Ordering Information in the documentation, never Copy
> Protect, and finally Never Prosecute.  If copies are found on a BBS,
> then the SysOp should be told to remove the posting and an advertisement
> be posted instead for the product.
>     First off, none of this will work.  Indeed, this type of logic makes
> me see nothing but red.  Terrell is trying to solve a complex problem
> which is not meant to be complex at all.  The very nature of the software
> market makes stealing software easy and natural.  Taking something from
> a shelf without paying is simple.  The methods of protecting that
> product are complex.  Piracy is stealing.  It is pure theft.  Thief.
> Crook.  Scum....

I did not mean to present a list of practices guaranteed to solve all
problems caused by piracy.  My intent was to give some suggestions that I
believe will lessen the problem.  I still believe that if a wonderful program
is released with an on-disk manual, it will tend to be pirated more often
than the same program provided with a paper manual.  None of my suggestions
were intended to solve the problem, all of them were intended to lessen
the piracy of software products, and take advantage of the "advertising medium"
of software piracy.

I absolutely agree with you that software pirates are thieves, and should be
prosecuted to the full extent of the law.  For almost one year I have invested
my free time into a software product, and the fact that piracy of my program is
guaranteed really makes me angry.  

However, as a software developer you really have only 2 choices:  regard 
pirates as scumbag thieves which contributes nothing to your profits, 
or consider pirates as potential customers, which really could contribute 
to your bottom line.  Actually there's a third alternative, which many 
software developers choose: ignore the problem altogether, and give 
customers little reason to pay money for the product.

Do you remember Bill Gates' "Dear Software Thieves" letter (in Stephen Levy's
outstanding book "Hackers")?  If I had been in the same situation, rather
than just venting my spleen, I would announce a new version of the program, 
present arguments about why buying the product is advantageous, and generate
some sales.  There's no way that I would let that amount of free advertising
go to waste.

And last but not least, I'm sick and tired of the argument that Atari users
are somehow worse pirates than everyone else.  All of the piracy that I
see involves people "bringing home" software from their workplace.  This
avenue of software piracy really isn't available for ST owners.  I have 
trouble believing that Atari users are worse pirates because they simply
have much fewer opportunities.

Has it ever occurred to these software companies that their Atari sales might
be lower than expected for some of these reasons:

1.	The product's ST instance is of significantly lower quality than
	it is for other machines.

2.	There are fewer Atari ST's in this country than IBM PC's and Macs.

3.	Potential customers are unconvinced that the ST instance of
	the product will ever make it beyond version 1.00.

etc.


Later,




Terrell