Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!linac!uwm.edu!spool.mu.edu!sdd.hp.com!ucsd!ucbvax!MorningStar.Com!bob
From: bob@MorningStar.Com
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: copy protection
Message-ID: <9101301523.AA08491@volitans.MorningStar.Com>
Date: 30 Jan 91 15:23:25 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 56

(I told myself I wouldn't get drawn into this non-TCP/IP related
discussion, but this pushed a button...)

   From: don@nic.the.net (Donald L. Nash)
   Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
   Date: 29 Jan 91 19:43:30 GMT

   In article <4605@lib.tmc.edu>, jmaynard@thesis1.hsch.utexas.edu (Jay
   Maynard) writes:
         p.s. Tops also implements a networked serial number
         comparison scheme.
      
      Thanks for passing that along. Yet another product to avoid.

   The copy protection scheme used by Tops is very inobtrusive.
   ...They don't get in the way if you are honest, since the cashier
   removes the target when you pay for the clothes.  But they do keep
   you from being dishonest.
   ...
   I have no problem using Tops, since it does not contribute
   unnecessarily to network traffic and since it does not prevent me
   from making backup copies of my disk.  And since I'm honest and pay
   for my software, it doesn't prevent me from getting my work done.

You missed the point.  The problem isn't just the network load, it's
the copy protection scheme itself.

You obviously haven't tried to run a lab of 100 Macintoshes using TOPS
for file service from a large UNIX machine.  Every time an undergrad
bombs h{is,er} Macintosh they must approach the help desk for help
rebooting.  The lab monitor must then ascertain which particular Mac
the student was using (often requiring a trip out into the carrels and
back), and get its specific TOPS boot disk from the drawer.  The
monitor must then go out into the carrels (perhaps for the second
time) and assist the student in booting the Macintosh.  During each of
these trips, the monitor is vulnerable to interruption by other users,
which creates additional delay in servicing the original user's
request.  Then the boot disk must be returned to the drawer so that it
can be found and used the next time.  This is an example of an honest
user being hamstrung by legitimate use of a copy-protected product, in
fact using it in a way that the product's marketing stressed as a way
to reap the major advantages from the product.

This certainly does prevent honest users from getting their work done.
Several years ago when I was on the facilities staff and helping set
this stuff up at OSU CIS, the president of Centram (which developed
TOPS before it was bought by Sun) sat in a conference room and told us
to our faces that they would provide us with a non-copy-protected
version of the software.  Based on that promise we purchased hundreds
of copies of TOPS, expecting the hassles I described above to be only
a temporary inconvenience until the new version arrived.  Needless to
say, it never did, and last I heard Sun hasn't honored that promise
either (not that there's any reason to expect them to - Sun's not
Centram, and Sun didn't make the promise).

Is it OK to slam a company that doesn't exist any more? :-)