Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!pt.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!rit!ultb!cms2839
From: cms2839@ultb.isc.rit.edu (C.M. Stuntz)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.programmer
Subject: Re: Copy Protection
Message-ID: <2551@ultb.isc.rit.edu>
Date: 23 Mar 90 03:38:12 GMT
References: <2796@dlvax2.datlog.co.uk> <90080.140503CMH117@psuvm.psu.edu>
Reply-To: cms2839%ritvax.bitnet@cunyvm.cuny.edu
Organization: Information Systems and Computing @ RIT, Rochester, New York
Lines: 34

In article <90080.140503CMH117@psuvm.psu.edu> CMH117@psuvm.psu.edu (Charles Hannum) writes:
>
>In article <2796@dlvax2.datlog.co.uk>, dartus@datlog.co.uk ( David Artus) says:
>>
>>We wish to evaluate possible copy protection methods that could
>>be used for PC software. 
>
>I only have one piece of advice:  No copy protection scheme is safe.

				and considering that . *please* spare us
users the immense irritation that invariably comes with copy protection
. although dongles claim to be transparent , they almost never are ,
meaning that you've just forced the user to buy a data switch . and
software - based encoding doesn't work , and makes using a hard drive a
pain . add to that the fact that i doubt that even if copy protection
were perfect , i doubt that you'd sell a single extra copy of software ;
most people who pirate probably wouldn't go out an buy it , even if  it
couldn't be copied .

				copy protection is such an enormous
headache that it is a major factor in deciding what software to purchase
. if there are two packages that are roughly equal , i guarintee you
i'll buy the one without the copy protection every time .

				thanks for your consideration . remember
AutoCAD and Lotus 1-2-3 ...

							-a.stranger

-- 
       @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
       @     "Imagination keeps the shadows away  -  Xymox      @
       @~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~@
       @  a.stranger  -  CMS2839%RITVAX.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu  @