Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!agate!ziploc!eps
From: eps@toaster.SFSU.EDU (Eric P. Scott)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next
Subject: Re: Copy Protection Mechanisms
Message-ID: <1088@toaster.SFSU.EDU>
Date: 4 Jan 91 03:22:55 GMT
References: <2983@pensoft.UUCP>
Reply-To: eps@cs.SFSU.EDU (Eric P. Scott)
Organization: San Francisco State University
Lines: 20

In article <2983@pensoft.UUCP> dany@pensoft.uucp (Dany Guindi) writes:
>against indiscriminate copying... It would be easy to simply use crypt and
>the hostid to "brand" the sold copy to the machine in which it is installed,
>but it would also be potentially easy to break that mechanism.

...and it would be very easy for that mechanism to break all by
itself.  All our machines got new hostids when we upgraded from
0.9 to 1.0, and no doubt will again when the '030s become '040s.

>                           What are other people using????

We, the customers, are using non-copy-protected products, and
will cheerfully use our collective influence to attempt to drive
your company under.

Have a Nice Day(tm).

Site Licensing is Your Friend.

					-=EPS=-