CompuServe Thread

#Copy protection?

9 messages in this thread
#149313From: Mr. ChalleronMay 29, 1994 2:25 AM
Yeah, I didn't think I had a grip on it…. We had some sort of "announcement" at work involving the notion that anyone who had DoubleSpace on their hard drive had to take it off (which I didn't understand because I thought the Stac/MS judgement only involved future sales); the notice (I got no "official" copy, since I use a Unix- platform at work) implied that neither MS nor Stac could support the product. I didn't think too much about it because the people who write these "company announcements" rarely know anything technical, but now that you mention it…. Mr. C (Amiga: Muerte O Suerte?)
#149355From: Spencer HendersonMay 29, 1994 3:06 AM
Dongle suck! I hate having to power down a system to swap out a joystick or parrallel port dongle. My ideal world would have the companies cut their final cost by getting rid of the dongles and passing the savings on to the purchaser. People don't balk at buying cheap software that does the job!
#149876From: SyndesisMay 31, 1994 4:19 PM
Pirates don't consider the price of software. They just want it, regardless of price. It's not possible to reduce the price of software indefinitely… you need to consider the effort involved in creating the software, the demand for the software (i.e., the total number of potential buyers) as well as the price of support. You can't expect good technical support if the software is cheap. Lowering the price indefinitely certainly increases the risk that the company might go "belly up" sooner than later. There's no easy way to raise the price of software, once it's been lowered.
#149983From: Spencer HendersonJun 1, 1994 2:24 AM
I agree that the creators of the software deserve their compensation, but some software prices are outrageous, especially in the WINDOZE and Lackingtosh worlds. I also agree that hardcore pirateers will probably stop at nothing to illegally duplicate software. The point that I was trying to get across was that a lower price would help prevent the average shmoe from installing an "evaluation" copy of software on his/her harddisk. I feel that these people pirate not due to any overwhelming desire to pirate, but out of a fear of spending several hundred dollars on software that doesn't suit their needs. I also tried to raise the issue of how much the hardware protection costs, and that one way of cutting end user prices would be by eliminating the dongles. Kim
#150014From: SyndesisJun 1, 1994 9:43 AM
If you think a program's price is "outrageous," then you don't have to buy it – but please don't pirate it, either. The high price is not a justification for stealing someone else's work! If you understood my last message, you should realize that some software might be priced high because of either little demand or high demand… that's what a marketplace is all about. People often say, "well, you can sell a million at $100 or one at $100 million, and you'll make the same amount of money." Not true – the tech support and sales overhead is very different in those two cases. Even if software was $25, I think people would still "evaluate" the same way. What's the difference between saving $25 and saving $200? I see people drive an hour to save $5 on a product "on sale" across town.
#149449From: Terry CarrollMay 29, 1994 3:43 PM
<< We had some sort of "announcement" at work involving the notion that anyone who had DoubleSpace on their hard drive had to take it off (which I didn't understand because I thought the Stac/MS judgement only involved future sales) >> I believe you are correct — you don't need to remove DoubleSpace from legitimately purchased copies. As reported in the April 1994 issue of The Computer Lawyer (p. 2), "In response to the verdict, Microsoft is now releasing MS-DOS without any data compression feature, as DOS version 6.21. Owners of MS-DOS versions 6.0 and 6.2 can continue to use the infringing DoubleSpace compression utility, however, since Stac will receive damages to cover all infringing copies already sold."
#149574From: Harry ManolopoulosMay 30, 1994 2:35 AM
Does this mean the Compression and de-compression software calls have also been removed from MS-DOS, or just the use of them for disk compression? HarryM
#149632From: Terry CarrollMay 30, 1994 1:20 PM
I'm not an MSDOS user, so all I can tell you is the excerpt I posted. I gotta believe that the calls were removed, too, though.
#149660From: Don Curtis/SYSOPMay 30, 1994 4:44 PM
Harry, My *guess* is that they removed the programs dblspace.* which had the compression routines, but left the hooks in boot code and OS itself to preload their future version of dblspace (without offending code). Don