Xref: utzoo rec.music.synth:16946 comp.sys.apple2:8122 comp.sys.amiga:71190 comp.sys.mac.misc:5457 comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc:3427 misc.legal:22420
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!caen!umich!sharkey!cfctech!ttardis!rlw
From: rlw@ttardis.UUCP (Ron Wilson)
Newsgroups: rec.music.synth,comp.sys.apple2,comp.sys.amiga,comp.sys.mac.misc,comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc,misc.legal
Subject: Do *NOT* reveal or mention "hacking" information (was Re: paper clip trick)
Message-ID: <2653@ttardis.UUCP>
Date: 8 Nov 90 22:26:24 GMT
Organization: Gallifrey
Lines: 47

In article <9011081036.AA12627@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU>, JROSSI@EAGLE.AAMRL.WPAFB.AF.MIL writes:
>As a secondary issue, it is nice to think that the NET does have corporate
>ears.  I hope that enough anti-copyprotection information can be revealed here
>to really shake them up.  Copy protection is wrong and the manufacturers
>should know that they are only diservicing their loyal customers by employing
>it.  If we keep showing them we can beat them after all the $$$ in putting
>the stuff on the software, maybe they will join the ranks of all the other
>software houses who have woken up and removed the vile beast.

NO!!!!  ABSOLUTELY NO!!!!

Do *NOT* reveal, or even mention, any information on how to defeat copy
protection.  In the eyes of the law, doing so reduces the NET to the status
of a pirate BBS.  More importantly, the owners of the systems that make up
the NET do NOT want the bad public image of pirates and hackers to be
associated with their systems/companies.  If the NET gets a bad image, the
system owners will pull the plugs on the NET.

>Keep on breaking that code.

Do *NOT* encourage code breaking, hacking, or other such activity on the
NET.  Again, it tends to give the NET a bad image.

>Remember, however, you also owe it to yourself
>and to the manufacturers to abide by their copyrights.  The stuff ain't yours
>to give away.  

This is the *ONLY* thing in your article you said that I can condon being
said on the NET.  It is something that cannot be said enough.

Don't get me wrong, I greatly despise censorship.  However, distribution of
this kind of information is illegal.  The very existence of the NET depends
on not being perceved (sp?) as a "den of thieves".  The same "corporate eyes"
to whom you want to prove your point might just decide to use archives of
articles on the NET to file law suites against contributors to the NET.  While
those people would certainly deserve the consequences thereof, the resulting
bad publicity would hurt EVERYBODY on the NET.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
About MS-DOS: "... an OS originally designed for a microprocessor that modern
                kitchen appliances would sneer at...."
                   - Dave Trowbridge, _Computer Technology Review_, Aug 90

                                     iwblsys\
rlw@ttardis	    uunet!rel.mi.org!cfctech!ttardis!rlw
                sharkey.cc.umich.edu/
    rel.mi.org is currently sick - back in 2 weeks.