Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!seismo!dimacs.rutgers.edu!dorm.rutgers.edu!medici From: medici@dorm.rutgers.edu (Mark Medici) Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms Subject: Re: Copy protection for MS Windows applications Summary: Just say NO. Message-ID: Date: 26 Sep 90 17:34:21 GMT References: <24605@sequoia.execu.com> Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J. Lines: 33 cb@sequoia.execu.com (Christopher D. Brown) writes: >I hate copy protection but we must still use it in select >markets. The vendor that supplies our MS DOS copy protection >and LAN user count control does not (yet?) do Windows. Are >the any vendors addressing copy/LAN protection for MS Windows? >"Yes"s (if any) will be summarized. What markets would they be? Except for games, I can't understand why any one market would be more succesptible to pirating than others. If your products offer a good value, are well supported, and backed by an update policy that rewards registered users (instead of alienating them), pirating should be no greater an issue for you than anyone else. Excluding games (which have, unfortunately, always been the most pirated software around), most mature users will eventually purchase legal copies of all the software they use, as long as the cost of the software represents a fair value. If one product is being pirated more than another, perhaps its value has been overestimated. The market ultimately decides the value of software, artifically high prices notwithstanding. The microlabs I run at Rutgers have a policy that excludes software that uses copy protection of any form, or LAN metering that complicates server installation for its own sake. We, and I believe most network administrators, implement our own anti-pirating policies and mechanisms. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mark Medici/SysProg3 * Rutgers University/CCIS * medici@elbereth.rutgers.edu ----------------------------------------------------------------------------