Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83 (MC840302); site duvel.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!mcvax!philmds!duvel!frans
From: frans@duvel.UUCP (Frans Meulenbroeks)
Newsgroups: net.micro.pc
Subject: Re: software protection - dongles
Message-ID: <94@duvel.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 17-Jul-85 03:26:06 EDT
Article-I.D.: duvel.94
Posted: Wed Jul 17 03:26:06 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 20-Jul-85 03:55:10 EDT
References: <566@alberta.UUCP> <5100083@uiucdcsb>
Reply-To: frans@philmds.UUCP (Frans Meulenbroeks)
Organization: Philips S&I MDS Eindhoven
Lines: 50

In article <5100083@uiucdcsb> jabusch@uiucdcsb.Uiuc.ARPA makes a case
against copy protection. Without actually quoting him, I'll comment
on some of his objections.

Of course software protection costs the customer money, however
indirect it may be. But as you point out, the base-price of a package
depends on the estimated number of copies sold. This estimate is higher
if there is a *good* protection scheme available. So there is at least
some justification for the statement that more copies (expected to be)
sold *may* lead to lower prices.

I agree that copy protection is not a good way to go. I agree with your
objections against it. But therefore I am proposing to use a dongle!
This makes it possible to copy the software onto everything, and one 
can create as many backup copies as one wants. But one can only use
one copy at a time, because the dongle is needed to run the package.
This dongle can be placed anywhere in the system. A dongle is much
less vulnerable to destruction than a floppy, and therefore more
acceptable I think. For those who still want a backup dongle:
Do you also have a backup PC??

The main disadvantage, I see, is that every product uses its own dongle,
and therefore one has to switch dongles too often. Therefore, the dongle
might (must?) contain a unique serial number, where all packages (at
least from the same manufacturer) check for. Badly enough IBM didn't
build serial numbers inside the PC.

If you are still complaining about the few bucks, copy protection
*might* cost you, then you should *never* consider buying a system with
a serial number built in (like a Sun), because that also causes extra
cost. (Actually you should never buy a PC, because that logo on the
monitor and cabinet cost money, and there is no use for it :-) (except
for snobs :-):-))) Are you also complaining when your system has an I/O
port which you will never use???

I advocate the following protection scheme:
Protection is done by checking for a unique serial number.
This makes backup copies possible.
If that serial number is not standard available, then a dongle with a
unique number is given *for free* when someone buys its first package.
They can be given for free, because good protection gives extra profit.
The next package he buys for the same machine, will check for the
same number.
Of course this scheme is not completely safe. But any scheme can be
defeated with enough effort. Its something, and it imposes no backup
problems.
Any objections (except dongle cost)?? Better ideas? Major defects?
-- 
	Frans Meulenbroeks, Philips Microprocessor Development Systems
		   ...!{seismo|philabs|decvax}!mcvax!philmds!frans