Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!microsoft!w-stephm From: w-stephm@microsoft.UUCP (Stephan MUELLER) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: Pirates and swapware Message-ID: <55535@microsoft.UUCP> Date: 28 Jun 90 20:01:44 GMT References: <1990Jun22.183227.2638@cbnewsl.att.com> <1990Jun24.075559.13459@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <90176.155439ESDYKE@MTUS5.BITNET> <1990Jun27.002024.27364@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> Reply-To: w-stephm@microsoft.UUCP (Stephan MUELLER) Organization: Microsoft Corp., Redmond WA Lines: 134 I've been reading this thread so long, I just had to add my $.03 (Cdn) In article <1990Jun27.002024.27364@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) writes: %Gee, I'd just use the computer I bought the program for; if that is a problem %for you, buy two copies, or get a site license. I'm assuming a bit of %ingenuity on the part of the software producers who write this stuff to %let it run with more than one serial numbered machine if that has been paid %for, without duplicating the entire distribution to make that work. I didn't buy the program for a single computer, I bought it for a single user: me. I should be able to install it on multiple machines as long as I ensure that it isn't used on more than one of those machines at a time. I am not going to buy two copies or a site license if I can make that assurance. Additionally, IMHO, if I (one person) am in a situation where I need to run multiple copies of the program simultaneously (as in the case of the networked user to whom you were replying above) I shouldn't need to buy a second copy or a site license. Am I allowed to run multiple copies of a program on one machine? Can I compile several programs simultaneously? Or should I be buying a copy of my C compiler for every instance of it that I run? Where is the significant difference when I move one of my compiles to a second computer? One copy per user, not per computer! %Since even the computer dealers and developers are pirating software, %according to reports published here, I doubt anyone would trust you, %me, or the local clergy with a non-protected solution, so your wallet %is perfectly safe. A problem that needs to be dealt with. More below. %>and most of all I want to be able to demonstrate my software on other %>peoples machines. % %Why? Do what I do, carry your machine with you. The secretary of TAUG, %(Tidewater Amiga Users Group) had his Amiga rigged up on a cart he could %roll in, plug in, turn on and go. Usual travelling salesman's headache; %but nothing that hasn't been coped with for hundreds of years. Remember %the traveling anvil salesman in The Music Man? Your problems are light %ones compared to his. I'm not able to carry my machine around with me; it's a relatively large system with lots of components and cables and stuff. Typical mad scientist setup :-) In any case, my software goes with me where my machine cannot. I'm glad it works for you, but IMHO, you are the exception, rather than the rule. %>On the lighter side, I have taken adventure games that I have %>purchased to friends Amigas to play at their house. My copy leaves their %>place without being pirated, but they usually have a better stocked %>fridge. :-) % %Anybody's got a better stocked fridge than mine; I'm jealous. Anyway, I %solve this problem by putting my console, keyboard and cables in a suitcase, %my monitor in the big denim sack I sewed for the purpose, toss in a few disks, %and go. No problem about bringing up software on a machine where it doesn't %work and fumbling the sale away trying to troubleshoot cables, add-in cards, %strange shells, buggy background software and all. I like to do the trouble %shooting after I've made the good impression, not before I have a chance. My fridge is pretty empty, but at least there's no mystery meat. The problem with software not working on another computer shouldn't exist. There's been enough discussion in this newsgroup about what good programs do and do not do. One of the things they do do is make best use of available resources. Another issue entirely, I know, but I don't agree that broken software is a reasonable reason for the serial number protection scheme. I buy software for my use, anywhere I see fit. Software is inherently portable; this is (to coin a phrase) a feature, not a bug. %Saying "this software is serial number linked, so I have to show it to you %on the machine it was purchased for" excuses the time you need to set up %your machine. ... and immediately leaves a bad impression on me. %I'll say it again; I want to be able to back up my software. If I can make %multiple copies (back it up) and those copies can run on multiple machines, %then I can pirate the software. You have to give up one or the other to % ------------------------- ------- ---------------- %prevent piracy. I choose to keep backups, and give up being able to run on %every machine. You may choose to keep universal executablity and give up %backups, you may choose to leave piracy rampant and the software market weak. %That is your choice. I simply want to suggest what I see as a better choice. I'm sorry, I need both backups and multiple machine installability. For me, then, the only solution is to live with piracy, or, better yet, cure it through education. Anything which inconveniences users is not likely to gain their support. Many people in this newsgroup have stated they won't buy protected software. Lotus, Microsoft, Borland and WordPerfect (just a random sampling) software is no longer copy-protected, because users demanded the protection be removed. These companies are not exactly hurting. Apparently some people are getting the message that software must be paid for. In the games market, it may take longer to get the message through, but it is getting there. In a perfect software world: - users would be happy because they have a supply of good software which they have acquired through lawful means and which they can use to its fullest anywhere, with as many backups as they please. The users are free to lend software to their friends, as they would lend a book or a car or a compact disc, secure in the knowledge that their friends wouldn't make a copy for themselves. - retailers and distributors wouldn't pirate software, since their brisk sales to all the wonderful users would make them all successful. - developers would be successful because of the honest users and hence would be able to always provide quality products, with good service, free bug fixes and inexpensive upgrades. Any solution that doesn't lead towards the above scenario is not acceptable to me. At present, all three factions are in a position where they can improve. %Manuals photocopy cheaply, any dedicated pirate is willing to type in a %photocopy-proof code sheet (Some type in whole manuals!), ditto making a %table of code wheel positions. I've seen all this done, and I won't tell %you how much I've done myself in an earlier incarnation, but take my word %for it, it's easy, the people doing it are bored, and they have time and %labor to burn. Absolutely. So why did you (and I) cease in our less than noble endeavours? Not because of any form of copy protection, but because we grew up. %Kent, the man from xanth. % stephan(these be my words, not Microsoft's);