Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!mit-eddie!ll-xn!ames!sdcsvax!ucsdhub!jack!crash!pnet01!haitex From: haitex@pnet01.cts.com (Wade Bickel) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: About Software Piracy! Message-ID: <2266@crash.cts.com> Date: 4 Jan 88 14:56:11 GMT Sender: news@crash.cts.com Organization: People-Net [pnet01], El Cajon CA Lines: 49 sean@ms.uky.edu (Sean Casey) writes: >In article <2258@crash.cts.com> haitex@pnet01.cts.com (Wade Bickel) writes: >> Why has't some provision to protect software been included in >> the hardware? Does C= think protectable software would hurt the >> Amiga in some way? > >Commodore would do well to think that hardware protection would hurt their >market. Then, people like me wouldn't buy their machines. Would you? > >Sean Why wouldn't you buy a system that supported some kinda of hardware protection? Lets suppose that the machine had a port on it made for a dongle, and that multiple dongles could be stacked upon one another. The software publisher then buys a dongle assignment from the manufacturer (maybe recieves the dongles and an encoder program from them). To run the software you must have the dongle. The computer manufacture could make the dongles expensive to copy in small quantities so that few would consider breaking the system through hardware. Assuming this would be feasible (I have not really thought it all the way through) it would mean A) cheaper software - because theft would be less of a factor and B) more software - because the buying market would be bigger. Both of which, in my mind, would be benificial. Also, no one would have to protect their software, so PD/PA would still be as it is. Thanks, Wade. UUCP: {cbosgd, hplabs!hp-sdd, sdcsvax, nosc}!crash!pnet01!haitex ARPA: crash!pnet01!haitex@nosc.mil INET: haitex@pnet01.CTS.COM