Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!linac!uwm.edu!rpi!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!usc!samsung!emory!gatech!ncar!csn!boulder!gore!jacob
From: jacob@gore.com (Jacob Gore)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: copy protection
Message-ID: <670011@gore.com>
Date: 29 Jan 91 16:51:25 GMT
References: <9101272223.AA08327@desktalk.com>
Reply-To: jacob@gore.com (Jacob Gore)
Organization: Gore Enterprises
Lines: 37

/ comp.protocols.tcp-ip / rlg@BIOBIO.DESKTALK.COM (Richard L. Gralnik)
/ Jan 27, 1991 /
>While I agree that copy protection can make life less than fun for an
>administrator trying to make sure he/she restores the correct unique
>set of floppies on a trashed machine, I don't understand why people 
>feel the vendor has no right to protect their (usually considerable)
>investment in product development from rip-off artists.

Of course they have that right.  But I'm under no obligation to buy from
them, am I?

>the fact remains, if you didn't pay for it, and it isn't freebie
>public domain software, then you stole it.  Trying to make the vendor
>into the bad guy is a poor attempt at self-justification/rationalization.

I don't like the vendor making me into the bad guy after I do pay for his
software according to his terms.  That's why I don't buy copy-protected
products.

>If you want to live on share-ware go ahead, but to say that people 
>should boycott a company that tries to keep you from making unauthorized 
>copies of their software...

I don't boycott the company, I only avoid copy-protected products.  When I
boycott a company, I buy nothing from them, use nothing from them, and try
not to promote them or their products in any way.  Avoiding bad products is
not boycotting.

>...is like saying you shouldn't go to the 
>supermarket because they prosecute shoplifters.

No, it's like saying you shouldn't go to a supermarket that strip-searches
all of its customers.  (Unless you're into that kind of stuff...)

Jacob
--
Jacob Gore		Jacob@Gore.Com			boulder!gore!jacob