Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!att!emory!wuarchive!hp48sx
From: hp48sx@wuarchive.wustl.edu (HP48SX Archive Maintainer)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.games
Subject: Re: Removing copy protection from SimCity
Message-ID: <1990Oct29.232759.6965@wuarchive.wustl.edu>
Date: 29 Oct 90 23:27:59 GMT
References: <1990Oct27.120152.2892@wuarchive.wustl.edu> <12801@chaph.usc.edu>
Organization: Washington University in Saint Louis, MO
Lines: 61

In article <12801@chaph.usc.edu> bkuo@aludra.usc.edu (Benjamin Kuo) writes:
>Why, might I ask, didn't he buy the NON-PROTECTED version in the first place?
>(A few dollars is NOT worth trying to dissemble a program!!) Or, is it
>not just in the interest of "not carrying a master disk" from home and
>work (I wouldn't recommend playing ANY game at work, either...) Something
>else, perhaps?
>
>Benjamin Kuo

There are more than just the "simple" fact that he can get a newer
version. Both me and my friend is living in Denmark, and this is $37
away from the US (air mail, each way).

He does not play the game at work every day, but he does so once in a
while. And there is always a risk involved in carrying the software
around. He also has a licence to run it on one machine at a time, 
it is nowhere stated that he may only use it on one specific machine and
never take it to another.

But there is also the fact that copy protection in this way is BAD. I
have heard that there a new copy protection scemes onthe way, which
installs the serial number of the machine into the software itself. This
means that you need to have the master to install a working copy. This
will stop pirating if the software can't be distributed further than one
person away. Nobody can steal a game from a public machine. This is OK
for me, as this does not bother the user when the program is installed.
This disk may also be copyprotected without  anybody but the pirate has
to know. 

I thinlk that all copy protection requiring user interaction every time
the program is beeing run is BAD!!!  :-(

Another user who wants to use the program on the same machine must
locate the master disk or the users manual. And if the person who own
the stuff have it at another place, then running the program is
imposible, although it may be legal.

PIRATING IS BAD :-(
COPY-PROTECTION REQUIRING USER INTERACTION IS BAD :-(
INVISIBLE COPY-PROTECTION IS ACCEPTABLE  me :-|  company :-)
NO COPY PROTECTION IS good for me :-) bad for the company :-(

Nobody can disagree with me, there is a need for copyprotection on some
software (mostly games), but it should not uneed user interaction

BTW: Upgrading to a newer version would cost my friend more than buying
a new copy!!!! This will also be the case if his master disk breaks. So
it is just natural to try to protect your property. I guess that Maxis
will not pay the expenses he gets when the master breaks and he can't
use the program. Even though it is indirectly their fault that he is
then unavailable to use their program. Maybe a lawsuit in the US could
then ensure he will get a replacement free of charge ???

This must be enough talk for this time,
Povl H. Pedersen
eco8941@ecostat.aau.dk   /   hp48sx@wuarchive.wustl.edu
 
-- 
*******************************************************
Povl H. Pedersen             hp48sx@wuarchive.wustl.edu
HP48sx archive maintainer