Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!spdcc!ima!johnl
From: johnl@ima.ima.isc.com (John R. Levine)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: prolock (A good reason to do copy protection, believe it or...)
Summary: doesn't make sense
Message-ID: <3207@ima.ima.isc.com>
Date: 22 Jan 89 21:53:07 GMT
References: <1423@leah.Albany.Edu> <16800408@clio> <484@octopus.UUCP>
Reply-To: johnl@ima.UUCP (John R. Levine)
Followup-To: alt.flame
Organization: Segue Software, Inc.
Lines: 15

In article <484@octopus.UUCP> pete@octopus.UUCP (Pete Holzmann) writes:
>If you are making a custom system (small quantity type thing, including
>hardware usually), you can't afford to have it get stolen. ...

Huh?  If your system includes hardware, why would you need to copy protect
anything?  Presumably without the hardware, a stolen copy of the software
wouldn't do anything useful.

Also, there are the usual arguments that the people who steal the software
are as likely to turn around and buy a copy of the program that they wouldn't
otherwise have known about, as to be cheapskates who are a lost sale.
-- 
John R. Levine, Segue Software, POB 349, Cambridge MA 02238, +1 617 492 3869
{ bbn | spdcc | decvax | harvard | yale }!ima!johnl, Levine@YALE.something
You're never too old to have a happy childhood.