"Don Y" wrote in message
...
On 10/4/2015 6:51 PM, Robert Green wrote:

A dongle is livable. Something like Superlok that demands a file be
written
in a non-standard way, not so much. I recall we came in on two Mondays
in a
row with the entire network locked up because the backup had failed due
to
Lotus' copy protection failing verification.

Plans to replace Lotus with Excel were soon underway and it was gone by
the
next accounting cycle with only a few die hards having Lotus still on
their
desktops. When tech inquiries to Lotus made it clear they weren't going
to
work with us on the subject of failed restores we chose another option.

There are still plenty of industrial programs that use dongles, but very
few
that I know of that use deliberately corrupted media. (Ducks in fear
that
I will now learn about all the software that still uses corrupt media to
protect their IP).

DVD video relies on this heavily.

And was cracked a long, long time ago by a 16 year old kid. Also, I don't
run my business from DVDs so there's a bit of a structural difference
between the two.

The fact that Excel (unprotected) buried 123 tells us something about
people's tolerance for copy-protected software that could fail them at the
worst time possible - after a network crash. We bought licenses for every
seat but even so, we could NOT afford to spend the inordinate amount of time
we did trying to restore 123 from a tape backup of the HD.

Ages ago, floppy "key disks" were "marginalized" -- so that their contents
were not *reliably* read. The verification software simply tried to read
them several times. If it got consistent results, it knew this was a
forged copy. If the data changed "mysteriously", it knew that this was
a genuine medium that was deliberately "flakey".

They also punched physical holes in the disks to accomplish much the same
thing, IIRC.

If you could have a "free" car but had to spend an hour running around
pushing levers, adjusting settings, mixing fuel, etc. just to get
an hour's worth of use out of it, would you? Knowing that you'll
have to do the same thing *tomorrow* for an hour's use at that time?

Well, it's not really *that* bad using freeware. People also realized that
the marginal cost to the manufacturer of SW box # 2 is very much not the
same as tangible property.

It's like when they closed Napster and the CD industry collapsed. They were
so paranoid about copying they ignored what Napster did for them. I used it
all the time to find music to listen to - and then to buy - because I
couldn't stand the chatter of commercial radio stations.

I didn't start buying music again until Napster had basically forced the
industry into a la carte sales of songs. Eventually even the RIAA had to
give up on its campaign of suing grandmothers for thousands of dollars
because their grandkids set up Napster on the computer.

Just the other day I had to help a person convert a Region 2 DVD into one
she could play. She had no idea that the world has been carved up into DVD
regions that don't support one another.

I also have some issues with supporting companies like Disney who managed to
change the copyright laws to their liking at the expense of the very concept
of copyrighting. Mickey's copyright *should* have ended long ago but Disney
*bought* Senator Hollings (aka Senator Disney) and he spearheaded changing
the copyright laws to favor Disney and not the general public.

When Lexmark tried to use the DMCA to prevent people from refilling printer
cartridges any sympathy I might have had for the big guys evaporated.

Would you use a "free" cellphone (exclusively) if the chances of getting
signal were 50% at any given time?

If the chances of freeware working were only 50% I'd agree with that
analogy, but it's not. It's more difficult to use, but not by that large a
factor.

How much time would you be willing to post comments on user forums
HOPING to find a GENUINE solution to the problem you are having
trying to get your FOSS spreadsheet program to calculate your
income tax bracket before you could file your tax return?

Probably as much as I might spend finding out how to do what I need to do
with a paid software program. I got one of the new 50 dollar Kindle Fire
tablets and the documentation is atrocious - and I own it fair and square.
Paying for something is no guarantee of good (or any) support.

How many times will you tolerate downloading and installing updates
in the *hope* that something that you are having problems with gets fixed?

That's MS, Apple and any company that has to publish updates. They've all
failed at one time or another.

How much RISK do you run that those updates don't BREAK something
else?

The rule of computing for a very long time has been; "The Upgrade Giveth and
the Upgrade Taketh Away." It's usually a crapshoot as to what comes and
what goes.

Or, change its behavior in a way that sends you scurrying back to
those same forums asking how you NOW perform the task that you previously
KNEW how to perform?

Again, that's Windows, Apple and even Unix when a new version or a bugfix is
required. Why did MS change "Find" to "Search?" Perhaps we'll never know
but changing 'happy' to 'glad' just for the sake of changing something has
been going on for a long time - way before the PC revolution.

Someone has to pay for the efforts of those developers. Just like
someone has to pay for the doctor who treats/cures your malady, the
accountant who balances your books, the farmer who grows your
food, etc.

Software is perceived differently than all of the above (right or wrong)
because it's IP, not tangible property and not work confined to one client
or customer.

So, why is software considered different? Free to steal -- if not
outright free?

Stealing a piece of software is not the same as stealing a tangible good
like a truck fill of vegetables. Steal from the farmer and he's out real
time and money that it will take to regrow that crop. Steal from a SW and
the physical damages are the incremental cost involved with making another
copy.

With Free/Shareware it's the cost of disk storage space and perhaps not even
that with CNET and other places that will take on the distribution cost. I
am not trying to justify the theft, only to answer your question as to why
people think it's OK to rip off software. People just don't see IP the same
way as tangible property.

--
Bobby G.