Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!lll-winken!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!usc!jarthur!sburke
From: sburke@jarthur.Claremont.EDU (Scott Burke)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.handhelds
Subject: More on ROM extraction
Keywords: ROM,Piracy,extract,48
Message-ID: <10594@jarthur.Claremont.EDU>
Date: 1 Feb 91 00:59:04 GMT
Organization: Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA
Lines: 96

Boy, isn't this fun.

>      I disagree. If I buy software, I don't OWN the software; I am licensed
> to use it. What if I damage/lose/suffer theft of the application card?
> Are you telling me I automatically lose the license I paid for? This isn't
> how most software vending works. The only difference between most software
> and the applications cards is the media. The courts have already ruled
> that I have the right to copy my software for archival. So legally, I can
> copy those ROMS for my own backup purposes if I wish, and I listed three
> reasons why I might want to do that.

1.  I called HP and asked how I could break my ROM card.  Static electricity
    above and beyond their testing criteria is one approach.  Breaking it in
    half is another.  The opinion was that I would have a _really_ hard time
    damaging the circuitry.  If I did zap the thing, I could send it in and
    get a new one if it was under warranty (one year).  I think that backing
    up a very reliable ROM card is a flimsy excuse for public distribution 
    of the ROM extraction code.

>      Even if "they" didn't own the card, it wouldn't be piracy. Technically,
> it would be 'software creep'. It would only truly be piracy if the copies
> were being sold. And if "they" owned the card, plugging it in takes a port.
> I think the original poster meant that he wanted to buy the card, and extract
> only those pieces he used, so he could save the port. Nothing illegal there.

2.  I can't argue semantics with you, because honestly I don't know the legal
    definitions of software piracy or 'software creep', whatever that is.  My
    intuitive understanding is that if somebody uses commercial software that
    I write without paying for it, I don't like it and am willing to call it
    piracy.  One of the original posts _was_ just about extracting a piece of
    a card they owned; the other original post _was_ about veiled pirating,
    because they didn't want to _buy_ the whole card.

>      So what? The possibility of piracy is an accepted fact. He is using
> a distribution channel that most of the world uses- disks. If EVERYONE put
> their blasted code on applications cards, NO ONE would buy them, since only
> two slots are available.

4.  I know the possibility of piracy is an accepted fact, but I think you will
    find it reasonable of me to worry about it as a commercial developer.  ;-)
    Not everyone will put their code on ROM cards.  I agree that disks are 
    quite useful (Even Steve Jobs has seen the light!), but I don't feel
    inclined to, say, distribute my code on ROM card _and_ disk, simply so the
    user can have that choice.  The reason is _not_ that I am draconian about
    piracy, but that I have not yet been convinced it is necessary.

>      It takes longer than three seconds, and you know it. Especially if
> like me, you want to be real careful. It potentially can be a real hassle.
> Besides, what if my application requires TWO 128k cards? Then what do I do?
> Not buy YOUR software? I'm sure you wouldn't like that.

6.  Ok, ok, I timed it.  6.5 seconds to pull out the EQLIB card and plug in
    the Sparcom Personal Information Manager.  8 seconds to go the other way,
    because the EQLIB card has 6 auto-configuring libraries, whereas the PIM
    only has 1.  I'm not sure what being real careful means.  If it means not
    leaving important data on the stack, you're right; that data must first
    be stored because the 48 will warm start when the ROM is changed.  The
    statement, "It potentially can be a real hassle." is not an argument, and
    I have _not_ been convinced that it is an overwhelming problem to have to 
    pull out one card and insert another.  Sure, it's a minor annoyance, but
    it certainly isn't of the magnitude of working on a floppy-based Macintosh,
    like in the 'old' days!  It's a few seconds--maybe 15 or 20 if you're slow
    and have to putz around and find the other card.  To me, the advantage of
    having the ROM extraction tool does _not_ outweigh the piracy issue.

    Name an application that requires 288K to run...  I can name an application
    that should use a PC or palmtop!!  ;-)  In the same vein, what if your 
    application requires THREE 128K cards?  You're just out of luck, unless 
    someone does a bus extender for the 48. Even then, the address space of the
    CPU is probably only 512K, so you're going to have bank swapping, and you
    _still_ won't have access to everything at once.

>     I started by saying that I was playing devil's advocate. That's because
> I would not pirate software. On the other hand, I truly believe that
> I have the right to protect my investment from something as trivial as
> static discharge. I DO NOT buy software that I cannot personally back up.
> That doesn't automatically mean I give it away. Hell, if I'm the registered,
> user, I wouldn't want MY copy floating around.

You have that right.  My point is it is _not_ necessary to back up a reliable,
solidly tested ROM card, and that no one has yet demonstrated a supportable
reason for needing more than 1 slot (assuming a merged 128K RAM card).  I am
a developer, and _I_ don't need 2 slots.  I am certainly _not_ going to write
programs that _do_ need that!  Just like I won't shoot myself in the foot! ;-)
It'd be really nice if the 48 had, oh, six or seven slots, but lets keep in
mind that this is a calculator.

(I don't think this necessary, but it is not my intention to demean or insult
any of the other participants in this discussion; I am merely trying to provide
a viewpoint somewhat different than that held by most users.  E-mail me if I
stepped on your toes.)


Scott.

sburke@jarthur.claremont.edu