Message-ID: <504@mprvaxa.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 25-Mar-84 23:04:01 EST
Article-I.D.: mprvaxa.504
Posted: Sun Mar 25 23:04:01 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 28-Mar-84 00:45:22 EST
Organization: Microtel Pacific Research, Burnaby BC
Lines: 33



      I am probably going to catch sh*t for this, but I'm getting tired of
people making statements like "The microcomputer software industry is
losing billions of dollars a year due to software piracy."  These
statements are usually based on the assumption that if N pirate copies of a
program are made, then that means a loss of N sales.  This is simply not
true.  Much of the piracy is by hobbyists with limited budgets.  In many
cases, the hobbyist would not buy the pirated program in the first place.

      So, while I am sure that sales are lost due to piracy, I am equally
sure that the amount is far less than some would have us believe.

      What is my solution to the problem?  Reduce the prices to the level
where the average user is willing to pay to get an original diskette,
instructions, and package.  For games, I figure this to be about ten or
fifteen bucks.  For other types of programs?  Well, Turbo Pascal might be
a good example.

      Protection schemes don't work.  No matter how clever you are in
protecting your software, there is someone equally clever who will figure
out how to copy it.

      Footnote:  A friend of mine wrote and markets a spelling checker for
the TRS-80.  He occasionally gets calls that go something like:  "I've been
using your program and I think it's really great, so I'd like to buy a
copy."

			   Brian Smith (mprvaxa!bsmith)
			      Microtel Pacific Research 

(The opinions expressed in this article are not necessarily those of any
real person, living or dead.)

Message-ID: <804@ihuxq.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 27-Mar-84 10:29:13 EST
Article-I.D.: ihuxq.804
Posted: Tue Mar 27 10:29:13 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 28-Mar-84 01:20:44 EST
References: <504@mprvaxa.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL
Lines: 22

--
>>>       ... I'm getting tired of
>>> people making statements like "The microcomputer software industry is
>>> losing billions of dollars a year due to software piracy."  These
>>> statements are usually based on the assumption that if N pirate copies
>>> of a program are made, then that means a loss of N sales.  This is
>>> simply not true.

I agree.  Good software can stand the free advertising.  Indeed, I know
folks who have pirated software and liked it so much they bought their
own copies.  The rationale: "Let's keep a good company in business."
Also, they were able to get updated versions, all documentation, and
plenty of help from a phone call, things not available when you pirate
programs.  Writers of quality software should understand that one can
steal their code but not their reputation.
-- 
                    *** ***
JE MAINTIENDRAI   ***** *****
                 ****** ******    27 Mar 84 [7 Germinal An CXCII]
ken perlow       *****   *****
(312)979-7261     ** ** ** **
..ihnp4!ihuxq!ken   *** ***

Message-ID: <704@ihuxx.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 28-Mar-84 13:33:46 EST
Article-I.D.: ihuxx.704
Posted: Wed Mar 28 13:33:46 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 30-Mar-84 00:15:08 EST
References: <504@mprvaxa.UUCP> <804@ihuxq.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL
Lines: 51

This is a very sore point with me.  I *will not* steal software--and
Ghod knows of the temptations in this business, with wildly
over-inflated prices and poor customer relations.  But some people
are starting to operate quite intelligently; here are some real-life,
current examples:

MicroSolutions, of DeKalb, IL markets a program called Uniform.  It's
a CP/M program to provide diskette formatting and interchange
capabilities for a wide range of computers.  Originally marketed at
$49.95, the price was perfect; but it 'featured' an elaborate copy
protection scheme that rendered the master copy good ONLY for making
two (count 'em--2) copies of the program.  These diskettes could not
be copied, and the master couldn't be executed.  If those disks ever
went bad, you had to send in the master to be re-genned, for a $10.00
fee.  This led to two things--first, my losing a night of sleep to
figure out their scheme (I did), and secondly, scads of complaints to
MicroSolutions.  In an amazing burst of reason, they re-issued an
improved version of the program, without the obnoxious copy
protection.  (Unfortunately, shortly after the re-release the price
climbed to $69.95, but it's still just within the reach of a
reasonable price.)

J. G. Communications, of Tucson, AZ markets a hardware real-time clock
for the Osborne 1; along with the hardware is a decent set of utility
programs.  They will sell the source to these programs--on a floppy,
with documentation--for $12.00; the object comes free with the clock.
Rationale?  As the author told me, "They can have the source.  I'll
have something better out before they can."  Makes bug fixes and
reports much easier.

I'm afraid I'll have to withhold the name of the company, and the
product, for this last one;  I haven't asked the person involved if
they want full details popularly known on this deal.  But suffice to
say that the author of a quite popular 'C' compiler, who is a friend
of mine, discovered that I am doing some work on a Zenith Z-100, but
the people who bought the machine aren't going to shell out the
$300-$400 such a compiler costs.  He *gave* me a current copy of his
system, with only the constraint that I not further distribute it.
Purpose?  He wants me to work with it, get to know it, and recommend
it.  (I just don't know if he wants people to know about the
freebie.)  If this product ran on my z80-based machine, you'd better
damn well believe *I'd* shell out the cash, after working with it; and
at least one client has ordered the system, because of my recommendation.

Purpose of this (much longer than I intended) article?  To show that
all is not darkness on the software market, and, frankly, to spread
the name of those companies that are making some effort to work with
consumers, instead of against them.

			Dave Ihnat
			ihuxx!ignatz

Message-ID: <19338@wivax.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 28-Mar-84 18:03:33 EST
Article-I.D.: wivax.19338
Posted: Wed Mar 28 18:03:33 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 30-Mar-84 02:15:32 EST
Sender: mckeeman@wivax.UUCP
Organization: Wang Institute, Tyngsboro, Ma.  01879
Lines: 22

There is little disagreement that using software that is
for sale and for which you have not paid is wrong.  So is
making a copy of an article out of BYTE.  The most
effective solution I have seen is software that announces
its ownership and how to pay for it, and where to get the
documentation.  If the software is real cheap ($15+costs)
most folks will prefer to pay to have a clear conscience.
The documentation is much easier to protect -- print it in
a xerox-combatting color or size.  And charge more for it.
I paid $60 for the IBM DOS manual and to my surprise found
a DOS-floppy in it.  The folks who are trying to follow
the American dream and get rich (not the poor little fellow
hunched over his ADM3) will have to learn to protect their
products.  It is illegal to rob a bank.  It is also hard
and dangerous.  You also do not brag about it in public.

(FLAME ON)
Let's hear more inventiveness and less whining on this
issue.
(FLAME OFF)

Bill McKeeman  Wang Institute  ...decvax!wivax!mckeeman

Message-ID: <1405@aluxe.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 30-Mar-84 07:35:13 EST
Article-I.D.: aluxe.1405
Posted: Fri Mar 30 07:35:13 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 31-Mar-84 07:28:11 EST
References: <19338@wivax.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Allentown, PA
Lines: 4


Correction: It is not illegal to copy an article out of Byte if
you bought the magazine and only you use the copy.  That is "Fair Use".
Of course that is true of software.  

Message-ID: <744@orca.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 30-Mar-84 12:40:28 EST
Article-I.D.: orca.744
Posted: Fri Mar 30 12:40:28 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 1-Apr-84 07:07:26 EST
References: <504@mprvaxa.UUCP>
Organization: Tektronix, Wilsonville OR
Lines: 56

I'd like to demonstrate how some recent comments defending software
piracy can be applied to another industry.

	"I'm getting tired of people making statements like "The
	microcomputer software industry is losing billions of dollars a
	year due to software piracy."  These statements are usually
	based on the assumption that if N pirate copies of a program
	are made, then that means a loss of N sales.  This is simply
	not true.  Much of the piracy is by hobbyists with limited
	budgets.  In many cases, the hobbyist would not buy the pirated
	program in the first place."

Ditto for automobile theft, where people assume that N car thefts imply
a loss of N car sales.  Also not true.  Much car theft is by hobbyists
with limited budgets.  In many cases, the hobbyist would not buy the
stolen car in the first place.

	"So, while I am sure that sales are lost due to piracy, I am
	equally sure that the amount is far less than some would have
	us believe."

And no doubt some car sales are lost due to theft, but I'm quite sure
that the amount is far less than some would have us believe.

	"What is my solution to the problem?  Reduce the prices to the
	level where the average user is willing to pay to get an
	original diskette, instructions, and package.  For games, I
	figure this to be about ten or fifteen bucks.  For other types
	of programs?  Well, Turbo Pascal might be a good example."

And I think the solution to the car theft problem is to reduce car
prices to the level where the average driver is willing to pay to get a
new car and owner's manual.  For Hondas, I figure this to be about four
hundred dollars.  For other types of cars?  Well, Army surplus jeeps
might be a good example.

	"Protection schemes don't work.  No matter how clever you are
	in protecting your software, there is someone equally clever
	who will figure out how to copy it."

Auto ripoff protection schemes don't work.  No matter how clever you
are in locking and anti-burglarizing your car, there is someone equally
clever who will figure out how to steal it.

---------------

My point is that it is a fallacy to claim that software piracy is
somehow okay because the evil software vendors overcharge or the poor
hobbyists can't afford to buy all the wonderful software.  These issues
are not relevant to the question of right or wrong.

Using someone's software without permission is stealing.  A person who
does this is a thief.  It's as simple as that.

  -- Andrew Klossner   (decvax!tektronix!orca!andrew)      [UUCP]
                       (orca!andrew.tektronix@rand-relay)  [ARPA]

Message-ID: <1272@pur-phy.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 31-Mar-84 15:41:46 EST
Article-I.D.: pur-phy.1272
Posted: Sat Mar 31 15:41:46 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 1-Apr-84 07:47:35 EST
References: <504@mprvaxa.UUCP>, <744@orca.UUCP>
Organization: Purdue University Physics Dept.
Lines: 46


   I really wish people would admit/signify that certain thoughts
about this issue are a matter of their personal ethics.  To some,
piracy = theft.  If you feel that way fine, but that doesn't make 
it true!  PERSONALLY, I equate this issue with that of the people
who have been sued for building antennas and converters for HBO
transmissions.  If a transmission is available for me to pick up,
then I'll pick it up when ever I damn well please.  If HBO doesn't
like it then they should encode their transmission in a manner that
makes it somehow easier for me to rent the equipment from them, than
it is for me to do it myself.  Similarly, software houses should
put something into the program to make it difficult to copy.  If I
would have to spend weeks trying to hack out a copy of some program,
I'll probably just say the hell with it and go out and buy it.
    To put in plainer terms, if there has been no effort made
to protect the software, then making a copy is just like picking
up a $20 bill off of the street; i.e. the former owner was careless
with it, so tough!
    The big exception, of course, is with licenced software.  By
copying this stuff, you help your friend to break a formal contract.
On top of the legality problems, the person who loaned you the
software has proven that his word is worthless! 'nuff said.
    All I can say about the small one-person software producers, is
that they can use their modems and band together.


    P.S.  I fully expect flames about this, but I'd rather hear
(and might even enjoy) some thoughtful criticism.

      (Hopefully, the above line will douse most of those who
type without thinking.)




       (`')           (`')
         \\   _____   //           Writing cause I got work, hanging by
          \\ /     \ //             my bruised ,bleeding and mangled thumbs
           \/ O   O \/              at the off-the-wall teddy bear keyboard of
            |   o   |
             \_____/                ERIC STROBEL
             /|+++|\
            //-----\\               decvax!pur-ee!Physics:els
           //       \\
         (_^_)     (_^_)  
                        

Message-ID: <2372@allegra.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 31-Mar-84 22:35:31 EST
Article-I.D.: allegra.2372
Posted: Sat Mar 31 22:35:31 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 1-Apr-84 08:31:04 EST
References: <504@mprvaxa.UUCP>, <744@orca.UUCP>, <1272@pur-phy.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill
Lines: 28

[]

	... If a transmission is available for me to pick up, then
	I'll pick it up when ever I damn well please.  If HBO doesn't
	like it then they should encode their transmission in a manner
	that makes it somehow easier for me to rent the equipment from
	them, than it is for me to do it myself...

	... if there has been no effort made to protect the software,
	then making a copy is just like picking up a $20 bill off of
	the street; i.e. the former owner was careless with it, so
	tough...


Hmm...  I pay for HBO, and the last time I found a bill on the ground,
I found out who it belonged to and returned it.  Maybe Eric will think
I'm a bit strange, but that's ok, because I think he's a putz.


	... certain thoughts about this issue are a matter of their
	personal ethics...


Personal ethics?  What the hell does this guy know about personal ethics?

-- 
	Alan S. Driscoll
	AT&T Bell Laboratories

Message-ID: <48@ucbvax.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 1-Apr-84 12:55:12 EST
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.48
Posted: Sun Apr  1 12:55:12 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 3-Apr-84 20:15:13 EST
References: <744@orca.UUCP>
Organization: U.C. Berkeley
Lines: 19

Andrew Klossner's argument that stealing cars is like stealing
software would be quite correct if you could stick your car into
your garage, press a button, and make a duplicate car, and in
fact a lot of people did favors for their friends by making them
cars like this. If this happened I would say that the automobile
industry was in a lot of trouble. Nobody would think of making
it illegal to do this, though (except those who believe in
things like farm price supports). Clearly when a software
product comes out, a certain number of people are going to buy
the thing, and then a certain number of additional people are
going to get copies from them. Software companies should expect
this and market their products accordingly. For the government
to support those who cannot write good software and would not
survive without the "protection" of the copywrite laws is like
paying farmers to destroy their crops to keep food prices
high...

	Wayne Christopher

Message-ID: <206@utmbvax.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 2-Apr-84 04:00:23 EST
Article-I.D.: utmbvax.206
Posted: Mon Apr  2 04:00:23 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 4-Apr-84 03:26:51 EST
References: <504@mprvaxa.UUCP>, <744@orca.UUCP>, <1272@pur-phy.UUCP>, <4482@amd70.UUCP> <1683@ut-sally.UUCP>
Organization: U TX Medical Branch @ Galveston
Lines: 18

> Has anyone have to wait 2 or 3 (or more weeks) because your legitimate copy
> of XXXX did not boot and you did not have a backup copy because it was
> protected?
> When this does happen to you then you will consider "illegal" backups
> legal.

No, I've never had that problem because I refuse to purchase any copy
protected software.

I don't think many of those who've been flaming about stealing software
consider backups illegal, no matter what the licensing agreement.  I'd
consider that fair use.  It's unfortunate that publishers feel they have
to resort to copy protection schemes to protect themselves.  To my mind, that
makes the software worthless.  Well, maybe they're just being shrewd.  Making
something worthless should reduce theft quite a bit.
-- 

	Mike Rubenstein, OACB, UT Medical Branch, Galveston TX 77550

Message-ID: <320@erix.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 1-Apr-84 15:28:15 EST
Article-I.D.: erix.320
Posted: Sun Apr  1 15:28:15 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 4-Apr-84 07:47:32 EST
References: <19338@wivax.UUCP>
Organization: L M Ericsson, Stockholm, Sweden
Lines: 15

>> (FLAME ON)
>> Let's hear more inventiveness and less whining on this
>> issue.
>> (FLAME OFF)
>>
>> Bill McKeeman  Wang Institute  ...decvax!wivax!mckeeman

More inventiveness in what? How to steal software?

If the methods (of stealing) were spread, or perhaps the products, then
there would be less whining on this issue. N'est-ce pas? :-)

				Robert Virding

UUCP: {decvax!philabs}!mcvax!enea!erix!robert

Message-ID: <2375@allegra.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 2-Apr-84 13:26:48 EST
Article-I.D.: allegra.2375
Posted: Mon Apr  2 13:26:48 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 4-Apr-84 07:49:12 EST
References: <504@mprvaxa.UUCP>, <744@orca.UUCP>, <1272@pur-phy.UUCP>, <4482@amd70.UUCP> <1683@ut-sally.UUCP>, <2Re: Software Piracy
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill
Lines: 8

Mike won't buy software that's copy protected, because it isn't worth the
hassle.  Eric won't buy software that isn't copy protected -- he'll steal
it ("like finding a $20 bill on the ground").  This all leaves the people
selling the software caught between a rock and a hard place...

-- 
	Alan S. Driscoll
	AT&T Bell Laboratories

Message-ID: <288@aat.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 2-Apr-84 17:41:39 EST
Article-I.D.: aat.288
Posted: Mon Apr  2 17:41:39 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 4-Apr-84 07:57:03 EST
References: <504@mprvaxa.UUCP>, <744@orca.UUCP>
Organization: Ann Arbor Terminals
Lines: 21

Andrew Klossner posts an analogy between stealing software and stealing
a car.  All analogies have their fallacies, but this analogy is particularly
bad.  It would perhaps have been better (if more abstract) had he phrased
it in terms of making an instantaneous copy of the car, rather than removing
the physical object itself.

With his analogy he obscures the central dilemma of the issue, namely that
there is a fundamental difference between stealing a physical object and
stealing information.  Whereas it is his right to equate the two on a moral
level, attempting to equate the two on the physical level helps neither his
case nor any resolution of the social issue.

Were the situation as simple as he indicates, this discussion would not
be taking place.  It is certainly his perogative to issue his own moral
admonishments, but I find it offensive to have such admonishments couched
in terms of faulty reasoning.

Michael Sleator
Ann Arbor Terminals
{mb2c|cbosgd|uofm-cv|psu-cs}!aat!sleat

Message-ID: <6787@decwrl.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 4-Apr-84 08:49:49 EST
Article-I.D.: decwrl.6787
Posted: Wed Apr  4 08:49:49 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 5-Apr-84 01:46:42 EST
Organization: DEC Engineering Network
Lines: 35

> The answer to the current problem of piracy is very simple.
> Allow customers to copy all the software they want. Then have
> the new owners send in a $5-$10 dollar  payment to the author.

> Also why not sell these newly registered owners the documentation
> for a reasonable cost (1 to 20 dollars). 

>				ihuxf!bryan
>				Bryan DeLaney

Finally, someone comes up with the right idea.  But you aren't the
first - I have an Apple ][+, and I am using Diversi-DOS, put out by
DSR, Inc.  When you boot up the Diversi-DOS master disk, you see a
screen full of text, of which the first line reads: 

PLEASE COPY THIS DISK AND GIVE IT TO EVERYONE YOU KNOW!! 

Further words explain that, if you are the recipient of such a copy,
it's illegal to use the program without paying for it, and that the
price is $30.00, please mail to 
.  Doing so will get you on 
the list for updates and telephone hot line assistance, etc.

The kicker is the line that reads, "YOUR HONESTY WILL HELP US TO
DISTRIBUTE FUTURE PROGRAMS IN THIS SAME LOW COST WAY." 

I dunno about you people out there in netland, but I got my copy by
sending in $30.00 after I was given a disk with just the DOS and that 
message on it.  Best investment I ever made.

Cheers,

Dick Binder
decvax!decwrl!rhea!dosadi!binder

Posted Wednesday 4th April 1984, 08:49 Eastern time by DOSADI::BINDER

Message-ID: <1683@ut-sally.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 2-Apr-84 03:06:39 EST
Article-I.D.: ut-sally.1683
Posted: Mon Apr  2 03:06:39 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 5-Apr-84 03:13:13 EST
References: <504@mprvaxa.UUCP>, <744@orca.UUCP>, <1272@pur-phy.UUCP>, <4482@amd70.UUCP>
Organization: U. Texas CS Dept., Austin, Texas
Lines: 10

a
Has anyone have to wait 2 or 3 (or more weeks) because your legitimate copy
of XXXX did not boot and you did not have a backup copy because it was
protected?
When this does happen to you then you will consider "illegal" backups
legal.

-- 
Daniel Canas, Computer Sciences Dept. University of Texas at Austin,
{ihnp4,kpno,ut-ngp}!ut-sally!canas

Message-ID: <289@aat.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 4-Apr-84 01:50:36 EST
Article-I.D.: aat.289
Posted: Wed Apr  4 01:50:36 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 7-Apr-84 01:47:49 EST
References: <504@mprvaxa.UUCP>, <744@orca.UUCP>, <1272@pur-phy.UUCP>, <4482@amd70.UUCP>
Organization: Ann Arbor Terminals
Lines: 4

Speaking of ethics, trust, maturity, etc., I was very impressed last time
I was in Windsor to see newspaper racks on the street where the papers
were on an open stand with an attached coin box.  You know, "honor system"....
Think you'd ever see this in the U.S.?

Message-ID: <240@masscomp.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 5-Apr-84 12:49:30 EST
Article-I.D.: masscomp.240
Posted: Thu Apr  5 12:49:30 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 7-Apr-84 02:58:13 EST
References: <504@mprvaxa.UUCP>, <744@orca.UUCP>, <1272@pur-phy.UUCP>, <4482@amd70.UUCP> <289@aat.UUCP>
Organization: MASSCOMP, Littleton, MA
Lines: 16

aat!marc notes:

	Speaking of ethics, trust, maturity, etc., I was very impressed
	last time I was in Windsor to see newspaper racks on the street
	where the papers were on an open stand with an attached coin
	box.  You know, "honor system"....  Think you'd ever see this
	in the U.S.?

The Chase Farms cider mill in Littleton, MA (right next to the Masscomp
building we were in until last November, when we moved a mile down the
road to Westford) has an unattended refrigerator with fresh cider in
it, a price list, a locked wooden box for putting your paper money in,
and an adequate supply of loose change sitting in a tray.  You takes
your cider, you pays your money.  Right here in the U.S.  Right now.

	Andy Tannenbaum   Masscomp Inc  Westford MA   (617) 692-6200 x274

Message-ID: <426@burl.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 3-Apr-84 11:33:40 EST
Article-I.D.: burl.426
Posted: Tue Apr  3 11:33:40 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 7-Apr-84 03:24:36 EST
References: <2134@ihuxf.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Technologies; Burlington, NC
Lines: 19

--
>The answer to the current problem of piracy is very simple.
>Allow customers to copy all the software they want. Then have
>the new owners send in a $5-$10 dollar  payment to the author.

>Also why not sell these newly registered owners the documentation
>for a reasonable cost (1 to 20 dollars). 

The answer to the current problem is *NOT* that simple.  People who
rationalize that it's moral to steal that which belongs to another
person ultimately are going to pick another rationalization to steal
when the old one becomes obsolete.

To put it another way, I really do doubt that a substantial number
of pirates out there are going to send in money that they don't have
to.  Why aren't they sending it in now?
-- 

				--Bill Buie

Message-ID: <427@burl.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 3-Apr-84 11:55:56 EST
Article-I.D.: burl.427
Posted: Tue Apr  3 11:55:56 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 7-Apr-84 03:24:50 EST
Organization: AT&T Technologies; Burlington, NC
Lines: 15

--
Allow me partially disclaim my earlier flame.  There are two reasons
why pirates will not send in reimbursement:

1) They may not know where to send the money.

2) They may fear that such a donation could open them up to
   litigation. In fact, I'm sure that it would.

So, given that the pirate stole initially, it is not surprising that
the pirate would decline initiative to reimburse.  I'll still stand
by what I said about the flimsiness of rationalization, though.
-- 

				--Bill Buie

Message-ID: <837@ihuxq.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 12-Apr-84 00:25:49 EST
Article-I.D.: ihuxq.837
Posted: Thu Apr 12 00:25:49 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 7-Apr-84 03:32:39 EST
References: <427@burl.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL
Lines: 33

--
You can call it stealing, as the law does, but that does not make it
immoral.  Is sex between unmarried consenting adults immoral?  In
most states it's sure as hell illegal.  I don't condone the copying
of software you're asked not to, but the issue is a real hard one.
When you engage in that activity, you have gained something, but
all the other person has lost (*NOT* like a car or jewelry, analogies
that have been proposed) is a potential market.  Most who buy
Illinois lottery tickets lose a potential fortune every day,
but somehow the state will not believe they've been ripped off.

The laws on software piracy exist to make it easier for software
producers to make a profit.  That is neither good nor bad--that's
how America works.  Parts of the tax code do the same for other
industries.  To say "you broke the law, so you are a bad person"
is to hide behind a very artificial distinction.  Laws on software
piracy have nothing to do with morality.  I believe there is a tenet
in law called "status to sue."  If you violate my civil rights, say
by illegal search and seizure--a 4th Amendment proscription, but I
can't show I've been damaged, I can't sue you.  No damage, no wrong.
Your action will possibly inconvenience me, perhaps embarrass me, but
if I can't peg that to real suffering I have no case.  So one
solution (to which I have no attachment) is for aggrieved software
writers, on a case by case basis, to have to prove damages.  The
principle of "de minimis" (the law does not bother with trifles,
which is why no one ever sues for $1.50) should also apply.  Comments?
-- 
                    *** ***
JE MAINTIENDRAI   ***** *****
                 ****** ******    05 Apr 84 [16 Germinal An CXCII]
ken perlow       *****   *****
(312)979-7261     ** ** ** **
..ihnp4!ihuxq!ken   *** ***

Message-ID: <780@ihuxw.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 5-Apr-84 16:31:45 EST
Article-I.D.: ihuxw.780
Posted: Thu Apr  5 16:31:45 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 7-Apr-84 03:45:10 EST
References: <504@mprvaxa.UUCP>, <744@orca.UUCP>, <1272@pur-phy.UUCP>, <4482@amd70.UUCP>, <289@aat.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL
Lines: 11

> Speaking of ethics, trust, maturity, etc., I was very impressed last time
> I was in Windsor to see newspaper racks on the street where the papers
> were on an open stand with an attached coin box.  You know, "honor system"....
> Think you'd ever see this in the U.S.?

We USED to!!!
-- 
Jim Kalmadge -  AT&T Bell Labs IX 1c415
8-367-0475
(312) 979-0475
ihuxw!kalm

Message-ID: <291@aat.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 5-Apr-84 12:21:08 EST
Article-I.D.: aat.291
Posted: Thu Apr  5 12:21:08 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 7-Apr-84 05:30:15 EST
References: <48@ucbvax.UUCP>
Organization: Ann Arbor Terminals
Lines: 18

Wayne Christopher says in regard to duplicating cars, "Nobody would think
of making it illegal to do this".  I beg to differ.

There is first of all the question of patents.  If one refrained from
selling the duplicates, perhaps one would not be in violation of the
laws regarding patented components of the car.  I don't know very much
about patent law, so I cannot speak to this point byond simply raising
it.

More to the point though, is the matter of copyright.  I haven't heard of
any car manufacturers copyrighting body designs, etc, but I see no reason
why such protection shouldn't be extended to them.  I believe I've seen
copyright protection applied in much more absurd cases than this.

Michael Sleator
Ann Arbor Terminals
{cbosgd|mb2c|uofm-cv|psu-cs}!aat!sleat

Message-ID: <6447@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 6-Apr-84 10:02:42 EST
Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.6447
Posted: Fri Apr  6 10:02:42 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 7-Apr-84 05:53:33 EST
References: <510@mprvaxa.UUCP>
Organization: Univ. of Maryland, Computer Science Dept.
Lines: 14

>  mprvaxa!bsmith:
>
>     Apple is fighting clone machines on every side while no-one is cloning
>  Commodore 64's.  The main reason for this is the Apple is priced much
>  higher than it has any right to be. (The development costs were probably
>  paid for by the first ten sales; the garage was paid for by the next ten)

Actually, the development costs were paid by HP... Wozniak designed the thing
for them and they didn't like it. The garage might have already been paid
for; who knows what financial state he was in?
-- 
Uucp:      ..!seismo!umcp-cs!rehmi     By the fork, spoon, and exec
CsNet:     rehmi.umcp-cs@csnet-relay   of Khron, Kernel ContreMain,
ArpaNet:   rehmi@maryland              Earl of Tetravale & Tumbolia.

Message-ID: <2978@fortune.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 6-Apr-84 17:33:22 EST
Article-I.D.: fortune.2978
Posted: Fri Apr  6 17:33:22 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 8-Apr-84 01:15:42 EST
References: <206@utmbvax.UUCP>
Organization: Fortune Systems, Redwood City, CA
Lines: 16

Re: backups vs. protected software

On some systems (e.g. the various Fortune UNIX-based systems), it is possible
to have protected software that can be backed up.  Unfortunately, it requires
that the original (and the copies) can somehow be "serialized" to a given
machine, maybe via a serial number in a ROM of some sort.  I realize that this
isn't applicable to all systems, but it is a possibility.

Didn't I hear something (a year ago?) about one or more chip manafacturers
offering CPU chips that had serial numbers in them?  (SEEQ is probably
working on something along those lines, I would guess).

				See ya!
-- 
				JR (John Rogers)
				UUCP: {ihnp4,cbosgd,ucbvax!amd70}fortune!jr

Message-ID: <188@wdl1.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 5-Apr-84 17:16:46 EST
Article-I.D.: wdl1.188
Posted: Thu Apr  5 17:16:46 1984
Date-Received: Mon, 9-Apr-84 05:31:37 EST
Lines: 9


    Piracy is a real problem for the high-cost business package.
One big plus is that at the high end, users expect support, and when someone
calls in asking for help, one has a chance to find out if he is legit or
not by asking for the serial number of his package.  Once you find someone
with an unauthorized copy, dealing with them is a problem, but with some of
the new anti-piracy laws, putting them behind bars is getting easier.  It's
a hassle getting them prosecuted, but it's amazing how the word gets around 
that you don't tolerate piracy once you get somebody jailed. 

Message-ID: <450@sequent.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 7-Apr-84 15:59:45 EST
Article-I.D.: sequent.450
Posted: Sat Apr  7 15:59:45 1984
Date-Received: Mon, 9-Apr-84 05:46:00 EST
References: <48@ucbvax.UUCP> <291@aat.UUCP>
Organization: Sequent Computer Systems, Portland
Lines: 6

I'd love to be able to "back up" my car, even if the purpose wasn't
for sales.  You know, just in case the first one "crashed" or
developed format problems.  Right.
___________________________________________________________________________
			from the confused and bleeding fingertips of
				...!sequent!richard

Message-ID: <4118@edai.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 13-Apr-84 18:40:37 EST
Article-I.D.: edai.4118
Posted: Fri Apr 13 18:40:37 1984
Date-Received: Mon, 9-Apr-84 06:09:14 EST
Organization: Art.Intelligence,Edin.Univ.
Lines: 27

If people make backup copies, that doesn't represent lost sales.
If they give copies to their friends, that does represent lost
sales.  What we'd like is a method for discouraging the latter
but not the former.  Doesn't matter if it doesn't stop ALL thefts,
nothing's going to do that, all the method has to do is persaude
some of the morally shaky purchasers that piracy isn't prudent.
So how about this:
1) Distribute object code.
2) Include 4 bytes in each program which serve as a (possibly
   encoded, say 1/256th of the numbers are valid) serial number.
3) In return for his $30, the purchaser obtains the right to
   make any number of copies for his own use, but he promises
   that in the event of anyone else being found to have a copy
   of his copy, he will pay the author $100 per stolen copy, up
   to a maximum of $2000.  (These figures as guesses.)  He
   further promises to pay a similar sum for each copy in his
   possession which does not bear the right number.
4) When you think someone has a stolen copy, check the serial
   number.

Checking the number of a stolen copy catches the backyard
pirate (sometimes).  The pirate who makes a business of it
and zeroes the serial number still pays if you can catch
him by other means (sometimes).  The question is whether
sometimes is enough.

Worth a try?

Message-ID: <3358@brl-vgr.ARPA>
Date: Mon, 9-Apr-84 09:33:07 EST
Article-I.D.: brl-vgr.3358
Posted: Mon Apr  9 09:33:07 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 10-Apr-84 07:34:22 EST
References: <48@ucbvax.UUCP> <291@aat.UUCP> <450@sequent.UUCP>
Organization: Ballistics Research Lab
Lines: 3

It's easy to back up your car.  Just move the lever to the "R" position.

-Ron

Message-ID: <3012@fortune.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 9-Apr-84 23:39:17 EST
Article-I.D.: fortune.3012
Posted: Mon Apr  9 23:39:17 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 11-Apr-84 01:48:59 EST
References: <1435@aluxe.UUCP>
Organization: Fortune Systems, Redwood City, CA
Lines: 18

Some excerpts from Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary:

  steal  vt: 1a: to take or appropriate without right or leave
         and with intent to keep or make use of wrongfully.

  appropriate:  vt: 3: to take or make use of without authority or right.

Note that removal of property is not necessary for stealing to take place;
removal is merely one of the possibilities, according to Webster's.
I recognize that this does not have the force of law, 
but as it has already been pointed out, the law on one hand,
and morality and ethics on the other, are not always in agreement.

-- Clay Phipps

-- 
   {cbosgd decvax!decwrl!amd70 harpo hplabs!hpda ihnp4 sri-unix ucbvax!amd70}
   !fortune!phipps

Message-ID: <12065@sri-arpa.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 6-Apr-84 16:37:54 EST
Article-I.D.: sri-arpa.12065
Posted: Fri Apr  6 16:37:54 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 11-Apr-84 05:30:49 EST
Lines: 9

From:  Michal Young 

Bravo, Alan.  There are others out here who attempt to return a 
found item, who call it to the clerk's attention when we receive
too much change, etc.  It is, as the previous correspondent noted,
a matter of `personal ethics,' but not quite in the sense he 
intended.  It is a matter of having personal ethics or not.
--Michal Young, UC Irvine
  young@uci 

Message-ID: <12069@sri-arpa.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 7-Apr-84 13:02:40 EST
Article-I.D.: sri-arpa.12069
Posted: Sat Apr  7 13:02:40 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 13-Apr-84 05:56:15 EST
Lines: 19

From:  Mark A. Rosenstein 

A better anology than car theft is the problems the entertainment
industry is going through with tape recorders for both records and
movies.  People have been copying records onto cassettes longer than
there have been home computers, and the record industry has not found a
fix for that yet.  Records do have better quality than tapes, and
consequently many people buy the record anyway, also to get the album
cover, however that is the same as buying some software to get the
instructions.

The closest thing the entertainment industry has found to a solution is
taxing the purchase of blank tapes, which has been proposed but never
adopted (hopefully they never will).  The problem seems to be
fundamental that for any read/write media that is usefull, it is
possible to make illicit copies of materials distributed on that media.
Perhaps personal ethics are the only thing stopping this from getting
compeletly out of proportion.
				-Mark

Message-ID: <714@ihuxx.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 11-Apr-84 16:19:26 EST
Article-I.D.: ihuxx.714
Posted: Wed Apr 11 16:19:26 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 13-Apr-84 07:17:23 EST
References: <206@utmbvax.UUCP> <2978@fortune.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL
Lines: 28

Without going too much into it, please read the latest issue of
Mini-Micro systems for a fascinating--and disturbing--new product that
is being marketed as a software protection scheme.  Basically, there
is a physical "fingerprint" actually embedded on the surface of a
floppy diskette, at a random track/sector location.  The protected
software knows about it, and can (somehow--not explained in the
article) access it.  Thus, if the software is on a different disk or
diskette, no go.  Problems?  On a hard-disk system, the device must be
in the floppy drive.  Also, backups aren't--you can't copy the
"fingerprint", so the program on the backup disk won't run without the
original.  The manufacturer maintains that, since you aren't
permitted to write the sector/track that the fingerprint resides on,
it can't go bad (?), and the backup is adequate; but they admit that
they expect to end up in court.  (I don't mind the protection, but if
the backup depends on the integrity of the original disk, I don't
trust it.)  As for the diskette always having to be in the boot drive,
they say they're figuring out a way to stamp hard disks.  (How about
multiple proprietary, protected programs?  They don't address it.)

AT&T is supposed to have purchased rights to use this scheme,
according to the article.

If people want details--the vol. and issue numbers of the Mini-Micro
Systems copy, company names, etc--I'll get them. (I'm at work, the
'zine is at home).  Just ask.

Dave Ihnat
ihuxx!ignatz

Message-ID: <12103@sri-arpa.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 8-Apr-84 21:38:07 EST
Article-I.D.: sri-arpa.12103
Posted: Sun Apr  8 21:38:07 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 14-Apr-84 09:16:28 EST
Lines: 13

From:  Bill Rizzi 

	The entertainment analogy is certainly more appropriate than
car theft, particularly when the work is the product of an individual
or small group of "talent", engineered, produced and distributed.
One of the major differences, however is that software must be continually
supported whereas once songs or films are in the can, it's mostly a
function of marketing.


                Bill (RIZZI@ISIB)

-------

Message-ID: <6543@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 13-Apr-84 19:09:43 EST
Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.6543
Posted: Fri Apr 13 19:09:43 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 15-Apr-84 08:26:17 EST
References: <6606@uiucdcs.UUCP>
Organization: Univ. of Maryland, Computer Science Dept.
Lines: 18

<>

Many people sell there expertice in a field for $20-$40 in the form of text
books.  No one loses any money on these and yet the market is not as large
as the (potential) market for good software.

Thus I believe people could make a living writing good software, providing
usfull documentation and some support and charge between $20 and $100.

The current prices (and copy protection policies) are a dissaster and may
yet destroy the home computer market.

Judd Rogers

-- 
Spoken: Judd Rogers
Arpa:   judd.umcp-cs@CSNet-relay
Uucp:...{allegra,seismo}!umcp-cs!judd

Message-ID: <4540@amd70.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 15-Apr-84 14:52:53 EST
Article-I.D.: amd70.4540
Posted: Sun Apr 15 14:52:53 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 15-Apr-84 23:40:15 EST
References: <6543@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Organization: AMD, Santa Clara, CA
Lines: 6

There's a difference between the authors of books and the authors
of software: the former don't have to provide support. That makes
software more expensive, by a non-trival amount.

-- 
Phil Ngai (408) 988-7777 {ucbvax,decwrl,ihnp4,allegra,intelca}!amd70!phil

Message-ID: <12060@sri-arpa.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 6-Apr-84 11:18:00 EST
Article-I.D.: sri-arpa.12060
Posted: Fri Apr  6 11:18:00 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 19-Apr-84 03:06:40 EST
Lines: 50



A number of related issues are being discussed (and flamed about, raved
about, etc) here.  At the risk of adding to growing pool of half-truth
and self justification, here goes.

First, if I remember my business law (and its been awhile, got a lawyer
hidden in this group?), then software piracy is not technically theft --
but it is usually a clear violation of the copyright laws.  Now, no
matter what justification you put on it, it is still ILLEAGAL to do
that.  If you feel the need to rationalize having done so by saying that
the product was not worth the price asked, then I hope you are not
deluding yourself that this made it any less illegal, and subject to
prosecution.  HOWEVER, there are a number of issues concerning the
copyright laws and software licenses that are not so clear cut, and
deserve thoughtful discussion, and the recent chain of items on multiple
CPU licensing is one of those subjects.

Software piracy is one of the hottest issues going, and I, like most,
have strong, but sometimes mixed feelings about it.  The idea that if
the producer didn't bother to heavily protect the software, then he's
being careless and its then ok to pirate it, is one that especially
bothers me.  I have a legitimate right as a purchaser/user of the
software to be able to create archive backup copies for my own use.  It
has gotten to the point now that very little home software comes in
unprotected form.  About half of what I have bought recently is
impossible for me to backup with unmodified hardware.  Now, either I go
out and spend a couple hundred dollars on hardware/software that will
let me beat these (but the next ones ?) schemes, or I'm
left  vulnerable to the loss of a product I paid hard earned cash
for.  Too many producers have adopted policies which make it
difficult, expensive or impossible for me to get backup copies from
them, and I find that a real problem.  And the problem gets worse every
day, mostly because of the attitudes and actions of a large minority of
people who, for  whatever reason, either see no wrong in piracy or justify
it or rationalise it.  Now I am not in the software-for-sale business, I
am a user; a user who is increasingly maddened by this situation.  Yes,
I think software is grossly over-priced in some areas, but noone is
forcing me to buy it.  If the software isn't worth (to me) the price,
then either I find a new price, different software or I do without.  I
think that piracy is irresponsible and is damaging the industry for all
of us.

Ok folks, let's hear some discussion of how we can solve this problem.
How do we preserve the rights of the user to legitimate copy
capabilities, provide him a useful way to examine and try the software
before purchase, how should industry determine realistic returns on
investment, is there a technical/ procedural/legal solution to the
pirating???
                       ...Dick...(Knisely.DSP1 -at CISL)

Message-ID: <141@plus5.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 27-Apr-84 11:02:08 EDT
Article-I.D.: plus5.141
Posted: Fri Apr 27 11:02:08 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 1-May-84 08:14:11 EDT
References: <12295@sri-arpa.UUCP>
Organization: Plus Five Computer Services, St. Louis
Lines: 41

[ News from Rivendell and the Shire, and points west]

People seem to be looking for 'reasons' folks pirate software.

	Well...

		I worked in a two game stores (Fantasy, Science-fiction,
	Historical, Role-playing, Board games, Miniatures, etc.) here in
	St. Louis for about 4 years.  Both had a computer for use by
	employees/employees.  They both sold time on the machine for
	customer use (mostly game playing).

		In no time at all, we were getting HORDES of people
	wanting to either trade games with us, or use the shop as a
	central (their term) 'pirate cove'.  Almost all of them were
	late grade school/early high school, and had their own
	computers, were using the computer at home, or were using the
	computer at school.  These kids were supposedly supervised and
	had, at the very least, tacit approval of whoever was monitoring
	their activities.

		Almost all of the adults who stole software used the
	copies until they either decided they liked the product, and
	subsequently bought it, or or decided they didn't like the
	product, and erased the media.

		Although this last use is still theft, I for one find it
	acceptable in a software market that I have found to be hostile
	to consumers.

		I have had more than one bad experience with
	unfriendly/braindamaged retailers, and truly horrendous
	documentation/manuals.  There are very few companies whose
	software I would buy based on publicity blurbs and a quick demo
	in some non-descript computer shop.  This is all you are likely
	to get in the way of reviewing software.  (Anybody out there
	with a contrary experience?)

		I have yet to find a dealer who wants you sitting around
	the showroom 'playing' with the software.  No dealer wants to let
	you take a sample home to test drive.  They all seem to think,
	and possibly rightly so, that you only want to copy their software.

		I realise this is rather rambling, >>sigh<<, but you asked.
---
                                        ~bj

   Plus Five Computer Services                           ...!ihnp4!plus5!bob
   765 Westwood Dr.
   St. Louis, MO 63105                                          314-725-9492

                        [ Copyright 1984 Bob Simpson ]

   _________________________________________________________________________
   |               All opinions expressed in this article should be        |
   |       considered the opinion of the author and not necessarily the    |
   |       views of Plus Five Computer Services or its employees.          |
   _________________________________________________________________________

Message-ID: <3819@utzoo.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 3-May-84 14:51:17 EDT
Article-I.D.: utzoo.3819
Posted: Thu May  3 14:51:17 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 3-May-84 14:51:17 EDT
References: <504@mprvaxa.UUCP>, <744@orca.UUCP>, <1272@pur-phy.UUCP>, <4482@amd70.UUCP> <289@aat.UUCP>, <240@masRe: Software Piracy
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
Lines: 43

The Honour system seems to reflect local cultural varaitions, and
history.   In England I grew used to seeing newspapars on sale with
an OPEN money-box.  I see them here in Canada, too, but not in the
big cities.

There does seem to be 'Honour system' for SOME software.  Some companies
will send you a demo-disk.  

There is another level to the piracy issue:  the cost.

Suppose you are a university professor writing a textbook on your
subject.  You have invested somthing like 10 years in getting to know
the subject, another X years on the text and so on.  You have cross-referenced
with articles and papers.  If you screw-up, make ridiculous assertions,
or mangle a reference you get laughed at and you book fails to become
a standard reference. (Unless you take a very Fun-damn-mentalist approach
and are willing to settle for it only being sold in Texas  :-))

How much will the book sell for ?   Between $30 and $90 probably.
What are the production costs ?  A friend in the industry tells me
this can vary from about 10% to about 30% of retail for textbooks.
Distributor mark-up is around 30-40%.  Marketing costs are lower than
"popular" books.

So what does a software package that takes about the same effort to
produce cost ?   Anywhere from $100 to $1400.  How well researched
is it ?  How well cross-referenced ?  Would you stake your professional
reputation for the rest of your life on the XYZ compiler or word-processor
you wrote for the PC ?

Judge by the textbooks you see and the programmes you use.

I am very against piracy.  I work for an information supplier and
distributor;  software and support text is my livelyhood.

However, I think the marketplace is VERY unbalanced, and until people
as individuals feel that the software they buy is worth ten times
that of another product with higher costs, there will be piracy.

In the mean time, I am glad of UNIX(tm) and the network, and that
I have an employer who supplies these things.

/anton aylward

Message-ID: <12250@sri-arpa.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 13-Apr-84 22:27:47 EDT
Article-I.D.: sri-arpa.12250
Posted: Fri Apr 13 22:27:47 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 12-May-84 02:17:19 EDT
Lines: 3

From:      Austin W. Barrows (IBD/ICB) 

Beautiful!

Article-I.D.: sftig.510
Posted: Mon Apr  8 11:35:18 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 9-Apr-85 20:01:17 EST
References: <324@cmu-cs-spice.ARPA> <7171@watdaisy.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Summit, NJ
Lines: 54
Xref: watmath net.games:1802 net.micro.apple:1868 net.micro:9971

> I read in a current medical journal (my wife is a doctor) that someone
> had come up with a clever solution to piracy... They give out software for
> free, and urge that it be distributed.. The rider is that the software
> contains a header notice inviting all users to contribute to the development
> of additional software (if they liked the product) by making a charitable
> donation to the developers of the software...
> Frankly, I strongly suspect that most receivers of under-the-counter software
> would be glad to contribute to the developers but don't have any reasonable
> way of doing it.  However, most people hate parting with cash too....
> Overall, this seems like a risky venture but probably no riskier than any other
> distribution method. As said earlier I market bridge and cribbage software
> for the P.C. and my advertising is current over $1,000 for 7 small lines in
> the blue book of P.C. for 6 issues.. That alone has put me out of business
> since sales are at around 100 copies.
> If anyone likes the above copy-protection idea send mail to me..
> I don't read net.games as much as I should.... all work and no play...

To: watmath!watdaisy!ijdavis
Subject: Re: Software Piracy
In-reply-to: your article <7171@watdaisy.UUCP>

The distribution technique you describe is sometimes called 'share-ware'
and I have seen a few things distributed that way.  I like the idea very much.

Usually, the appeal for contributions includes a promise of some kind of
support for those who send in their money.  To further sweeten the pot, I have
heard of at a variation on the 'support' theme in which you send in your money
along with a copy of the diskette you are using.  The author will send it back
with the 'latest' version and a 'unique serial number' electronically encoded.
(A time and date stamp would do fine for a serial number).  The person who
owns the serial number on the disk you sent in then gets a cut from
your contribution.  Anybody you give a copy of your own diskette to who sends
in his contribution will wind up paying you a 'sales commission' just like you
paid the person who owned the copy you sent in.  The beauty of this scheme is
that pirates make *no* money from it.  They actually wind up *helping* the
authors and legitimate users to get their fair share by providing the widest
possible distribution.

The biggest problem (assuming that you have a quality product, that will sell
itself to anyone who gets to play with it for a while.) is getting a wide
enough initial distribution.

Net.sources doesn't seem to be the ideal method (very likely flames from
people on the net about commercial use of the medium, etc.)  Maybe a short
note in net.general and net.wanted describing the 'product' and offering
to send a (free) copy of your shareware for evaluation to people who mail you
a stamped self addressed floppy.

The users on other bulletin board systems may not be so touchy as the netnews folks.
Maybe the 'private' BBS's are the right way to get something like this started.


Rick Thomas
ihnp4!attunix!rbt