Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!isis!ico!rcd
From: rcd@ico.isc.com (Dick Dunn)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.i386
Subject: copy protection, authorization
Summary: just terminology...
Message-ID: <1990Jul13.211604.12457@ico.isc.com>
Date: 13 Jul 90 21:16:04 GMT
References: <3126@rsiatl.UUCP> <604@vidiot.UUCP> <3169@rsiatl.UUCP>
Organization: Interactive Systems Corporation, Boulder, CO
Lines: 27

In order for people just tuning in to understand, let's note that the new
Interactive release (2.2) is *not* copy-protected.  The term "copy
protection" conventionally refers to writing the media (diskettes) in some
unusual format which prevents them from being read by a normal drive/driver
combination.  Usually, the strongest objection to copy protection is that
it prevents making a backup copy of the media.

Again, the 2.2 media are *not* copy-protected; they *can* be read as normal
diskettes.  The license for the software contains an explicit provision
allowing you to make a copy for backup purposes.

What *has* been done is to add an authorization step during installation:
You must enter the serial number of your software (which is printed on the
diskettes) and also enter an "authorization key" (which is printed on a
separate card supplied to you; the card also contains the serial number)
before installation will proceed.

I understand that the authorization-key tracking can be anything from a
minor nuisance to a major problem, depending on circumstances.  I'm not
going to enter the public fray on that one.  (Yes, of course I have
opinions!  But I work for ISC; almost any opinion I'd express would be
out of place here.)  I just want people to be discussing and making their
decisions based on the authorization-keying, not on an incorrect assumption
that it's copy-protected.
-- 
Dick Dunn     rcd@ico.isc.com  -or-  ico!rcd          (303)449-2870
   ...Reality is neat!  It works even if you don't believe in it!