Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rochester!ritcv!cci632!rb
From: rb@cci632.UUCP (Rex Ballard)
Newsgroups: net.micro
Subject: Re: Copy Detection Protection
Message-ID: <264@cci632.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 26-Jul-86 15:47:03 EDT
Article-I.D.: cci632.264
Posted: Sat Jul 26 15:47:03 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 26-Jul-86 22:16:06 EDT
References: <2366@brl-smoke.ARPA> <449@sunybcs.UUCP>
Reply-To: rb@ccird1.UUCP (Rex Ballard)
Organization: CCI, Rochester Development, Rochester, NY
Lines: 61
Summary: Why bother?

In article <449@sunybcs.UUCP> tim@gort.UUCP (Timothy Thomas) writes:
>In article <2366@brl-smoke.ARPA> C0144%CSUOHIO.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU writes:
>>
>>   I can't see *too* much sense in using serial numbered copy detection,
>>when in fact, a half-knowledgeable hack can search for the serial number
>>printed on the diskette label using Norton Utilities, etc., and knock it
>>out in one swoop.
>>
>>   Unless, of course, you encrypt the serial number (Hmmm, not a bad thought).
>
>Putting the serial number on a diskette is useless.  It wouldnt even
>matter if it was encrypted, because all somebody has to do is get a hold
>of 2 copies of the program, and compare the two files.

I think the point is being missed.  Yes, if you really want to buy two
copies of *every* piece of software you get, you *might* be able to
find the "copy detection" mechanism, and change it to something else.

The point of putting "detection" rather than "protection" on the disk
is 3 fold:

First, the detection can be used to thwart unsuspecting "amateur pirates",
who probably wouldn't bother to look, since there is nothing to prevent
them from making copies, putting it on hard disk, or whatever.

Second, although the professional pirate may put a different serial number
on the disk, it is a simply a matter of time before an end user calls the
publisher or original author for support.  If serial numbers are properly
tracked, the user of a pirate copy will give either a serial number that
has been registered to another owner, or an invalid serial number.  At
this point, the publisher has several options.  He can hang up on the
"support call", he can trace back through the "support call", or he
can sell the user a "new improved version", making the "support call"
a "sales call".

Remember, the point of "detecting pirate copies" is simply to prevent
spending a lot of time and money supporting copies for which you have
recieved no revenue, and to generate revenue from people who are already
satisfied customers, even though they have not paid for their copy.

For the user, the advantage of registering his copy is the same as for
"share-ware".  He will at least be informed of upgrades, bug fixes, and
new options.  In short, better service from the publisher.

This is mainly in response to the clamour and distaste for protection
schemes which have cost just as many sales as "detection" mechanisms would.
The main advantage is that the publisher reduces the risk of liability
for damages resulting from "haywire" protection schemes.

Some states are already considering "liability laws" for software which
causes hardship due to deliberate sabatoge such as copy-protection.
The old "main-frame and mini" style software contracts are not appropriate
in a market where one is potentially dealing with over 1 million customers.

As strange as it may sound, piracy could be the greatest advertizing "vehicle" 
ever devised, simply because of the nature of the software market.

If anyone is interested in discussing how to really take advantage of this
market, send mail.

	Rex B.