Xref: utzoo comp.sys.mac:11418 comp.misc:1738
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!hao!gatech!ufcsv!codas!killer!fmsrl7!eecae!crlt!michael
From: michael@crlt.UUCP (Michael McClary)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac,comp.misc
Subject: Re: Copy protection and the consumer
Message-ID: <1428@crlt.UUCP>
Date: 20 Jan 88 15:41:31 GMT
References: <4663@watdragon.waterloo.edu> <3823@husc6.harvard.edu>
Organization: CRLT , Ann Arbor, MI
Lines: 62
Summary: Draconian measures could kill your company, too.

In article <4663@watdragon.waterloo.edu>, palarson@watdragon.waterloo.edu
writes:

>Several wierd and wonderful methods of copy protection(such as serial numbers,
>dongles, and sentinel-viruses) and counterattacks (such as frying a pirate's
>hard disk) have been proposed.  []

And goes on to object to object to such measures.  Similarly, in article
<3823@husc6.harvard.edu>, chou@endor.harvard.edu (scott Chou) quotes him and
writes:

> I also avoid copy protected software like the plague.  Especially
> when there are plenty of excellent unprotected products to choose
> from.
> 
> My main complaint against copy protected software, especially the ones
> where drastic punitive measures have been taken, is that they too often
> end up destroying the work and time of even their legitimate users.
> [] Many of their little hacks end up being time
> bombs completely unaware of the evolution of the environment in which
> they operate.  Data incompatibility and corruption are almost always
> inevitable.  Of course there is always that possibility of a bug in a
> hallucinating CPU which accidentally invokes the Hard Disk erase trap
> intended for a pirate.

and argues for passive measures only.

I agree wholeheartedly.  I avoid any software that tries to copy-
protect itself, because it complicates operation and backups.  And
I consider any program including code designed to destroy other data
to be too hazardous to have on my system under any circumstances, so
I'll never buy a product I know is "protected" in that manner, and
I tell my customers to avoid such packages like the plauge.  But I
won't stop there.

I'd like to point out a possible pitfall to developers considering
the use of data-destroying boobytraps for pirates:

Suppose one of your legitimate customers is somehow bit by the trap.
Suppose it destroys a lot of important data.  Like a big chunk of his
business records.  Suppose he sues you for his losses.  You could lose
a >lot< more than any hypothetical pirate would cost you in lost sales.

You could lose >your< business, and your home and car.  (Even a corporate
shield wouldn't necessarily protect you - that "veil" can be "pierced"
when you deliberately do something that may cause damage to others.)
You could develop a reputation as "A guy who writes booby-trapped
software, like the program he wrote that took down company X", and
lose future business, too.

If your program, when it thinks it's been pirated, refuses to run, or
takes out its own object and/or database, that's one thing.  When it
goes after other data, that's quite another.

===========================================================================
  "I've got code in my node."	| UUCP:  umix.cc.umich.edu!node!michael
				| AUDIO: (313) 973-8787
	Michael McClary		| SNAIL: 2091 Chalmers, Ann Arbor MI 48104
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Above opinions are the official position of McClary Associates.  Customers
may have opinions of their own, which are given all the attention paid for.
===========================================================================