Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!ptsfa!ames!ucbcad!ucbvax!jade!eris!mwm From: mwm@eris.UUCP Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: Copy protection: boycott it! Message-ID: <4310@jade.BERKELEY.EDU> Date: Wed, 8-Jul-87 22:12:10 EDT Article-I.D.: jade.4310 Posted: Wed Jul 8 22:12:10 1987 Date-Received: Sat, 11-Jul-87 17:52:19 EDT References: <4826@sgi.SGI.COM> <4238@jade.BERKELEY.EDU> Sender: usenet@jade.BERKELEY.EDU Reply-To: mwm@eris.BERKELEY.EDU (Mike (My watch has windows) Meyer) Organization: Missionaria Phonibalonica Lines: 94 Keywords: software terrorism, copy protection, South Africa To those wishing this would go away: I think it's winding down. If you really want it to go away, suggest a *serious* other newsgroup. I'll gladly move it there. In article <2489@husc6.UUCP> hadeishi@husc4.UUCP (mitsuharu hadeishi) writes:I think you're working for EA has biased you towards them, and copy <>protection in general. They are a major force in the Amiga market. Them <>going out of business would be a moderatly bad thing for the Amiga < < Not to mention a terrible thing for the people who work there. Ah, so you think the Amiga is a game machine, then. Or you want the <>populace to percieve it that way. < < Non sequitur. No, it isn't, you keep yammering about games. If the Amiga isn't a game machine, then game makers should be a small part of the market. If they are an important part of the market, then it's a game machine. <>That's exactly the kind of blind following that's lead to the downfall <>of nations. Remember - Question Authority. < < Right on! (I'm just questioning Your authority in this case.) What Authority? I haven't given any commands, just urged people not to buy broken software. I didn't make any pleas about not buying the copy protected software being a disservice to the community, I didn't call refusing to deal with a company that consistenlty sells broken software "small-minded vindictiveness", and didn't try to play on peoples moral sense by pointing out that some company could (horrors) go out of business if people didn't do their duty by buying buggy or copy protected software. About the worst I did was call not buying copy protected software "politically correct" twice. [See, I can walk on the thin line of the ad-hominem attack, too.] <>I've never urged people not to buy all products from any specific <>company. < < But some people do. About the worst I've seen is people claiming that other people have quit buying software from companies because they keep getting burned. That's legitimate information to pass on about a company.