Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!pasteur!agate!web2e.berkeley.edu!laba-4an
From: laba-4an@web2e.berkeley.edu (Andy McFadden)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple
Subject: Re: Misc.
Message-ID: <7809@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: 19 Mar 88 00:49:04 GMT
References: <8803010456.aa29533@SMOKE.BRL.ARPA> <7441@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> <2675@crash.cts.com> <7650@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> <2692@crash.cts.com>
Sender: usenet@agate.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: laba-4an@web2e.berkeley.edu.UUCP (Andy McFadden)
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 25
Keywords: crack interrupt
Summary: REALLY now...

In article <2692@crash.cts.com> mkao@crash.CTS.COM (Mike Kao) writes:
>> It's not taboo.
>
>Yet you treat it as such in your talk. Why is this subject not "appropriate"
>to a general Apple users' forum? I believe that any topic that is legal is
>germane. I think too many people equate talk of deprotection to piracy. The
>two are distinct. Isn't there a clause somewhere grants people the right to
>make archival copies of their software? If so, then why can't people discuss
>HOW to do this out in the open, instead of being referred to some "underground
>magazine?

An underground magazine?!?  They've been publishing for about five years now,
advertising in nibble, softalk, and a number of other places.  Hardly
underground.

I just don't want to see this turn into a place for posting deprotection
methods, for the same reasons I don't want it to be a place where people
discuss the civil rights of armadillos: it's out of place.

I have nothing against deprotecting software; in fact, I strongly encourage
developers to distribute software without copy protection.  But if you want
to discuss it, start a new newsgroup.  I'll be the first to subscribe.

-- 
"They want to make backups?!?  We gave them two copies, one on each side
of the disk!"  - Utilico Microware [inferred]