CompuServe Thread

#Dongle Protection

8 messages in this thread
#100183From: Pete GouldMay 17, 1993 5:18 PM
Hi, all! I wanted to get your opinion on the following: Recently I received a hot new video-related program that's supposed to leave everything else in the dust. Price is in the $600-$700 range. When I opened the package, I found that it uses dongle protection. To operate the program, you need to insert a hardware device into the computer's second mouse port (an optional dongle is available for the parallel port — the optional one will pass printer data through a passthrough connector). I noticed on the company's warranty disclaimer the following: [COMPANY NAME OMITTED] warrants the dongles from manufacturing defects for a period of thirty (30) days from the date of pur- chase. Should the dongle fail in the course of normal use within this 30 day period, and it is returned to the dealer from whom the program was purchased not later than five (5) days after the end of such 30 day period, the dealer shall, at the dealer's option, either repair or replace the dongle. [COMPANY]'s liability is limited solely to repair or replace- ment of the defective product and shall not in any event in- clude damages for loss of use or loss of anticipated costs, expenses or damages, including without limitation any data which may be lost or rendered inaccurate, even if [COMPANY] has been advised of the possibility of such damages. I was wondering how popular opinions currently run as to the use of copy protection in general, and hardware protection in particular, on professional application software. All replies will be sent to the manufacturer of the product. Please excuse me for not embarrassing them by using their name, but my purpose is to educate them, not blindside them. Hope you understand. Any responses, on either side of the issue, greatly appreciated. Pete
#100193From: Bill EastburnMay 17, 1993 6:11 PM
Pete, Just my opinion, but I'd return the product to the manufacturer(with a note as to why) and purchase a competing product without a donge. Bill, K3OZM "Go CALFORUM"
#100260From: Jonathan BlackwellMay 18, 1993 12:33 AM
I would return it with a letter explaining why. -Jonathan
#100292From: Jim OgilvieMay 18, 1993 11:33 AM
Pete… A dongle, in my opinion, isn't such a bad thing provided that it does not interfere with the normal operation/expansion of the computer. The least obtrusive dongle that I have seen to date is the one that comes with Scala. It's a simple mouse/joyport dongle that plugs into either the first or second mouseport (your choice, either will work). It also passes the mouseport through, allowing you to plug a mouse INTO it. Given that every Amiga will have a mouse plugged into port one, you could put the dongle there and plug your mouse into the dongle. The only problem I see with this scheme is, what happens when you buy a second program that has this type of protection? And then a third? Anyways, as long as dongles don't "catch on" in a big way with software developers and they are limited to a few packages, and meet the above criteria of not interfering with normal use and expansion, then I don't think there's a big problem. Jim
#100306From: Steve SetzerMay 18, 1993 3:13 PM
Pete, I abhore dongle protection. I would would have a word lookup (and I hate that. IMHO Precision had the protection deal down pat: they sold a copy that required a dongle, but for $10.00 they would send you a non c/p disk with your name and serial # encrypted and dsiplayed in the opening screen. my .02 BTW how do you like Real 3d v2.0? …Steve ====>>> Motorola 68030 Inside <<<====
#100313From: John GagerMay 18, 1993 5:16 PM
Well I think software protection of professional product's only hurt's the honest user with a possible loss of productivity and/or data. Their 'shrink-wrap' disclaimer probably wouldn't mean a damn in court, and I would sue the pant's off them if I was a legal owner and their dongle caused me to loose business. There were some very good articles about warranty's and license dislaimers such as this in one of the recent issue's of MacUser and the general consent of most lawyer's was that a warranty disclaimer such as this would not hold in court. I believe that most professional people are not going to want to pirate the product in the first place. They want the original manual, technical support, and future upgrades that might be offered. So whenever someone put's copy protection on a product such as this, I feel they don't trust me, so I won't trust them to provide that support. As much as I would like to purchase the Scala multimedia authoring software, I will only do so whenever they remove the copy protection. Same goes for any professional software that comes along with copy protection.
#100386From: Don Curtis/SYSOPMay 19, 1993 2:21 AM
Pete, I'm not real happy with hardware dongles for a few reasons. 1. If you have more than one product that requires a hardware dongle, you end up plugging them in and out all the time. a. That's a real pain b. This is a multi-tasking computer, but you can't run two "dongled" programs at once. c. You will more than likely, at some point in time blow an 8520 if you contstantly plug dongles in and out. 2. Dongles should have lifetime warranties against defects. 3. Copy/use protection in general is useless. It provides very little protection for the publisher, and provies the user with nothing but headaches. This is particularly true of productivity software. Don
#100607From: John DraperMay 21, 1993 1:48 AM
Pete, I will not have a dongle-protected program on my machine, regardless of what type of program it is, and regardless of how well it otherwise performs its function. There cannot be a program so good that I would change my mind on this point. Others have pretty well covered the salient points… limitations on multiple dongles, danger of blowing an 8520 when plugging, and so on. The worst part is that on a multitasking machine, a dongle is trivial to defeat, for anyone who is trying to do so, which means that the real purpose of a dongle is to provide the vendor with a sense of security that makes him feel better even if it does absolutely nothing to deter theft. Given this situation, I cannot, in all conscience, support such stupidity. For application software that I use in my business (and I regularly use about 6 packages), I will not put up with any form of protection. Programs that I might otherwise consider, were it not for the protection, will not even get looked at by me. GLad you are passing thse comments along. Please feel free to use my name when you do. -larry