Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site bbnccv.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!whuxl!whuxlm!akgua!gatech!seismo!harvard!bbnccv!rupprech
From: rupprech@bbnccv.UUCP (Wolfgang Rupprecht)
Newsgroups: net.micro.mac
Subject: Re: copy protection
Message-ID: <763@bbnccv.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 16-Nov-85 23:31:59 EST
Article-I.D.: bbnccv.763
Posted: Sat Nov 16 23:31:59 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 19-Nov-85 04:05:21 EST
References: <1204@jhunix.UUCP>
Reply-To: rupprech@bbnccv.UUCP (Wolfgang Rupprecht)
Distribution: net
Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 28
Keywords: serial number copy protection


	I don't want to come across as a believer in copy protection,
I'm not.  (I also think that software houses often let greed play too
large a role in setting their prices. They could undoubtably stop a
lot of copying by lowering their prices.)

	Something that I have been toying with is another type of
'soft' protection. A software company could inbed unique serial
numbers in the software AND register these numbers at the time of
sale. The serial number could be done in several places, each time
encrypted in a different way. (Or better yet, linking subroutines in a
different order in each copy, with the serial number being the order
of the routines and linked in variables.  This would make it VERY
difficult to erase the serial number!) It wouldn't prevent people from
coping it. It would only make them think twice before they gave
somebody a program that COULD be traced to them. Again, it would be
possible to "file the engine block" in hopes of removing the tell-tale
serial numbers, but the nagging fear that you might have missed one,
and could be sued for damages for fathering hundreds of illegal copies
would undoubtably stop many. 

	What does the net think? 

				-wr
-- 
wolfgang rupprecht
{harvard, ihnp4, decvax}!bbnccv!rupprech
rupprech@bbnccv.arpa