Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2.fluke 9/24/84; site vax2.fluke.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!prls!amdimage!amdcad!decwrl!decvax!harpo!whuxlm!whuxl!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!fluke!kurt
From: kurt@fluke.UUCP (Kurt Guntheroth)
Newsgroups: net.micro
Subject: Another view on software protection
Message-ID: <890@vax2.fluke.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 13-Aug-85 13:26:12 EDT
Article-I.D.: vax2.890
Posted: Tue Aug 13 13:26:12 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 20-Aug-85 03:08:44 EDT
Organization: John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc., Everett, WA
Lines: 83

1.  Software and Economics:

Software has value because it does work for you.  Making it "free" won't
decrease that value.  People can charge money for software exactly in
proportion to its (perceived) value.  Even if there was no way to protect
software people will still be able to charge money for it just because they
already have a known copy of it and you don't.  Even if it were impossible
to charge money for software, a way would be found to recognize its value,
probably by bundling "free" software with something for which money could be
charged; hardware, training, service, etc.

It costs money to develop software.  The amount of software produced will be
in proportion to the amount that can be charged for it.  There are people
(artist-hackers) who derive non-monetary satisfaction simply from the
existence and use of their software.  Also, a certain amount of software will
be produced because it adds value to hardware, or because it reduces the cost
of some other function.  Thus even if it was not possible to charge money
for software a certain amount of development work would continue.

As was pointed out earlier, the chief difference between software and
previous kinds of goods, it that you can give away software and still have
it.  Software is like information in this sense.  On the other hand the
value of information to you depends (in various ways) on how many people have
access to it, while the value of a software product is likely to be just as
valueable to you no matter how many other people have a copy.

2.  Software and Ethics

When an individual buys tangible goods, s/he owns the goods and can use them
in any desired way.  The physical posession of the goods serves as an
excellent temporary marker or ownership, and the tangibility of the goods
gives real meaning to transfer of ownership.  Because of the intangibility
of software, restrictions on use are arbitrary, and largely unenforceable.
Restrictive license agreements thus encourage people to act in a way that is
technically illegal but seems morally defensible in the frame of reference
of tangible goods. Taking a copy of software doesn't degrade or deface
they physical original, it doesn't cost money.  The (non-developer) owner of
the original is no worse off and the copier is better off.  In fact the only
thing that has been damaged is the monopoly of the developer.  People seem
to see piracy as a somewhat heroic act under certain circumstances.

3.  Effective Copy Protection

There is no means to protect software from a determined pirate, just as
there is no unbreakable safe, or perfect military defense.  Further, any
means of protecting software must not be more restrictive than the
protection placed on tangible goods or people will not see the protection as
reasonable.  Thus any protection scheme must allow unlimited use of the
physical medium which represents the software by the purchaser.

The best copy protection schemes I am aware of are:

CD-ROM:  The media is difficult to make individual copies of, and
large-scale copying is easy to stop with legal action.  CD-ROMS hold more
information than other storage forms.  It is physically possible to copy a
CD-ROM onto floppies, just as it is possible to photocopy a book onto loose
pages.  However, the copy is not as useful as the original and thus the
advantage of a pirate copy is reduced.  In fact, the CD-ROM is a very
tangible kind of software.

Bundling with manuals:  Again, the key here is the physical presence of the
manual.  If it is difficult to use the software without manuals, and the
manuals are bound, and of good quality, people will seek out originals.

These two methods assume the cost of the software is not so high that users
will bear the reduced utility of the copies to achieve the monetary price
savings.

Bundling with hardware:  This scheme worked for IBM for years, and still
works for many hardware manufacturers in smaller markets.  If it takes
another copy of difficult-to-make hardware to run a stolen copy of the
software, piracy is effectively useless.

Of course in many markets software is now the dominant cost, so this scheme
is not universally applicable.

I also like hardware serial numbers built into the computer, but this
requires the manufacturer or vender to manufacturer each copy of the
software specially.
-- 
Kurt Guntheroth
John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc.
{uw-beaver,decvax!microsof,ucbvax!lbl-csam,allegra,ssc-vax}!fluke!kurt