home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!linac!att!cbnewsc!cbfsb!att-out!rutgers!zeus.ieee.org!fsbbs!f620.n2605.z1.ieee.org!eric.larson
- From: eric.larson@f620.n2605.z1.ieee.org (eric larson)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer
- Subject: Why the Piracy? Here's why...
- Message-ID: <21632.2B6293D3@zeus.ieee.org>
- Date: 24 Jan 93 02:54:05 GMT
- Sender: news
- Organization: FidoNet node 1:2605/620 - Shockwave Rid, Freehold NJ
- Lines: 33
-
-
- # 1. It's the status quo. Everyone _already_ copies everything
-
- All that does is make the intellectual property owners look for systems to
- protect their investment in other ways. Why do you think we have Macrovision?
-
- Which do you think is better? Crippled DAT systems, and Macrovision, or
- intellectual property laws that encourage authors/inventors to develop new
- works of intellectual endeavor?
-
- # 3. If there was no restriction on copying, there would be a
- # much more `darwinistic' evolution in intellectual
- # products. Inferior programs would stand a much smaller
- # chance of ever being used. (Example: if Apple software
- # was not protected by copyright law, there would be cheap
- # Macintosh clones, and _no-one_ would use MS-DOS or
- # Windows.)
-
- Well, there would be a Darwinistic evolution all right - companies who develop
- strong copy protection schemes would survive. Is this what you want to pay
- for? R&D into copy protection schemes?
-
- Look at the proliferation of games for systems like the Nintendo. Why can't I
- buy Street Fighter II for my Mac?
-
- Companies whose software was easily copied would fail. Of course, the user
- would be more than slightly inconvenienced by these copy protection schemes,
- but - I bet you would find pretty quickly that the most desirable software
- would also be the most effectively protected software.
-
- --
- =*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
- eric larson - Internet: eric.larson@f620.n2605.z1.ieee.org
-