Xref: utzoo rec.music.synth:17006 comp.sys.apple2:8262 comp.sys.amiga:71364 comp.sys.mac.misc:5553 comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc:3515 misc.legal:22504 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!att!linac!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!samsung!uunet!mcsun!ukc!edcastle!aipna!rjc From: rjc@uk.ac.ed.cstr (Richard Caley) Newsgroups: rec.music.synth,comp.sys.apple2,comp.sys.amiga,comp.sys.mac.misc,comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc,misc.legal Subject: Re: Do *NOT* reveal or mention "hacking" information (was Re: paper clip trick) Message-ID: Date: 11 Nov 90 05:35:47 GMT References: <2653@ttardis.UUCP> Sender: news@aipna.ed.ac.uk Organization: Center for Speech Technology Research Lines: 26 In-reply-to: rlw@ttardis.UUCP's message of 8 Nov 90 22:26:24 GMT In article <2653@ttardis.UUCP> rlw@ttardis.UUCP (Ron Wilson) writes: 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. What has `the law' got to do with it, has the court system started funding usenet feeds or something. I'm fairly certain it is not illegal, even in the USA, to distribute information about how to break the law; though things may be going that way. If it were every set of photocopier instructions would be illegal. I was taught how best to stab someone to death in school, was that teacher doing something horribly illegal? I don't think so. BTW. the best way to beat copy protection is to not buy anything with copy protection. Make sure you write to the manufacturer and tell them that you decided not to buy their product specifically because of this. Also mutter words about `merchantable quality', or US equivalent -- software with copy protection is definitly shoddy goods IMHO. -- rjc@uk.ac.ed.cstr _O_ |<