Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!ll-xn!ames!ptsfa!hoptoad!farren From: farren@hoptoad.uucp (Mike Farren) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: Copy protection: boycott it! Message-ID: <2374@hoptoad.uucp> Date: Tue, 7-Jul-87 02:10:09 EDT Article-I.D.: hoptoad.2374 Posted: Tue Jul 7 02:10:09 1987 Date-Received: Wed, 8-Jul-87 06:28:56 EDT References: <4826@sgi.SGI.COM> <4238@jade.BERKELEY.EDU> <640@nis.NIS.MN.ORG> <4259@jade.BERKELEY.EDU> <2470@husc6.UUCP> Reply-To: farren@hoptoad.UUCP (Mike Farren) Organization: Nebula Consultants in San Francisco Lines: 58 Keywords: piracy, copy protection, bungled burglary In article <2470@husc6.UUCP> hadeishi@husc4.UUCP (mitsuharu hadeishi) writes: > > That's fine for you (and me) Mike, but if you are interested >in getting software out to the masses, which I am, then I'm afraid >we're all going to have to live with copy protection. In order for >large-scale projects such as the ones envisioned by the consumer >software companies to get off the ground, some type of copy deterrent >is going to be required, or the consumer software industry could not >survive. I would like to see real data which indicates that this is the case. So far, all I've seen are suppositions and self-serving statements from companies on both sides of the copy-protection fence. My personal experience in the games industry is that copy protection doesn't give you all that much benefit, but I would like to see real, objective studies done. > What will happen is if games are distributed without copy >protection to the mass market (I exclude the Amiga from "mass market >since it tends to be a hacker's machine, and there is a kind of >hacker ethic which precludes illicit copying) is that the game >manufacturers will be unable to stay in business because of loss >of hard-earned remuneration for their work due to illicit copying. You've bought into EA's line hook, line, and sinker. I don't believe it, and never have. I cite my own experiences - when I worked for Epyx, Inc., I was present when copy protection was first added to their products. There was no significant change in either sales or the number of illicit copies of our games that I saw. We added copy protection more from a "well, everyone else is doing it, why don't we, too" attitude than from any documented proof that it was necessary. I have never seen any such proof since that time. I also point to Penguin Software, who dropped copy protection from their games and actually reported an increase in sales. Also Beagle Bros. software, long the most popular Apple utility software available, who have always maintained that copy protection just wasn't necessary, and appear to have done very well for themselves. My final argument: I have seen pirated copies of every EA game available. Often, the pirated copies have been available before the game had reached the local stores. As long as copy protection can be broken, it will be, and as long as there are those who want to pirate games, there will be illicit copies of games, protected or not. It doesn't seem to have killed the game industry yet, and I do not believe that it will. If anything, the annoyance of copy protection, especially the Draconian schemes that EA and Activision use, will cause a drop in sales because of the sheer frustration of the users. I know of at least 10 people who will not buy another EA product, no matter how good, because of the experience they have had with the existing products, and their frustration and anger at products which are annoying to use. -- ---------------- "... if the church put in half the time on covetousness Mike Farren that it does on lust, this would be a better world ..." hoptoad!farren Garrison Keillor, "Lake Wobegon Days"