Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!maverick.ksu.ksu.edu!hoss!hoss.unl.edu!greg
From: greg@hoss.unl.edu (Hammer)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
Subject: Re: Rastan GS
Message-ID: <1990Oct09.222131.16644@hoss.unl.edu>
Date: 9 Oct 90 22:21:31 GMT
References: <13958@smoke.BRL.MIL> <1990Oct7.050620.19014@isis.cs.du.edu> <9096@ucrmath.ucr.edu> <1990Oct8.060653.6435@eng.umd.edu>
Sender: news@hoss.unl.edu (Network News Administer)
Organization: Computing Resource Center, University of Nebraska
Lines: 71

... russotto@eng.umd.edu (Matthew T. Russotto) writes:
>... rhyde@ucrmath.ucr.edu (randy hyde) writes:
>>
>>BTW, "cracking" a game is definitely illegal based on current copyright laws.

>Are you a lawyer?  (Don't answer that, I've got a flame based on either
>answer)  The way I read the law (and I'm not a lawyer), cracking a game is NOT
>illegal, though distributing the cracked copy would be as illegal as
>distributing the uncracked copy.

Also, if cracking a game is illegal, how would you explain the (HD)
parameters found on Copy II Plus?  They are specifically designed to
remove copy protection for installation to your hard drive.  Distribution
of said game (or uncracked, just copied) would be illegal, and in that
sense the term "pirate" would come into play.  Someone who buys the
program and uses it for their own use (let's not get into the "one
machine" stuff right now) deprotected and installed on their HD is not in
violation of the law.

>>While I agree that protecting a piece of software is only going to hurt the
>>honest person, software companies are well within their rights to do so.
>>I don't even consider copy protection immoral.  Cracking and pirating are
>>both immoral and *ILLEGAL* activities.

>Why is it immoral to 'crack'--- deprotect --- software?

I don't believe it is.  Distributing the cracked copy would be.

>> It's amazing to read on this net
>>one message complaining about lack of support for the GS only to be followed
>>by a message claiming it's okay to "pirate" software.

Not to pirate, but to crack legal copies for own use, or use pirate copies
of something you already legally own.  (However the use of pirated
software from another source isn't wise anyway, since some unscrupulous
person may add a third step: crack -> infect -> distribute.)

>>I would apologize to
>>you immediately if you could prove you've *paid* for every piece of software
>>on your system and that you've never given away a cracked piece of software.

This may be the first thing you've said right.  You've basically said that
what everyone has been trying to "crowbar into your cranium" is legal.
It's just that your messages seem to state the opposite to what you just
said right there, and thus you've been getting flamage.  (Unless you
mistyped here.)

>Or, you could buy the software anyway, and distribute the instructions for
>removing the copy protection-- making it irrelevant, and hopefully convincing
>the company to drop it.

Instructions for cp removal are legal (hence the publications and programs
that are legal being legal) to distribute.  The resulting software from
usage of the parameters being distributed is illegal.  The originals
become your archive copies, and your unprotected version becomes your
usage copy.

>--
>Matthew T. Russotto	russotto@eng.umd.edu	russotto@wam.umd.edu
>      .sig under construction, like the rest of this campus.

Note: "crowbar into your cranium" comes from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the
      Galaxy, by Douglas Adams, said by character Zaphod Beeblebrox
      (paraphrased).


--
     __  _____________  __
     \ \_\ \__   __/ /_/ /  "The Law:  No Jumping"
      \greg@hoss.unl.edu/   "Why not? <jump> <jump> <blam>"
       \_\ \_\|_|/_/ /_/    "That's why."                   --I, Robot