🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <4676@ihlpg.ATT.COM> tainter@ihlpg.ATT.COM (Tainter) writes:
>Copy protection based on use of a serial number unique to a machine is
>NO COPY PROTECTION AT ALL and is expensive for the seller since he has to
>customize each copy he sells!
>--j.a.tainter

It's actually not so bad.  If OS/2 got a serial number, and this became
common, it could be quite simple.  For example, if the machine had a modem
(even a $30 300 baud modem would do) the software could call up the
vendor's office, either via 800 number or packet network, and do the
serial number initialization and customer registration quickly and cheaply.

More advanced authorization would require humans.  One company could set
up a central clearing house of 800 numbers, so that small companies could
buy time on a per use basis with little up-front cost.   Well worth 3%
to stop casual piracy.

Of course it can be broken, just like any scheme can be broken.  Mind you,
it's a little harder in a protected mode OS like OS/2 where, if you did
things right, the user would have to patch the OS to debug a program that
was not debugger enabled.  (I don't think they've gone this far in OS/2)

With a serial number in OS/2, you could still see protection removers, but
they would no longer have much to stand on.  They would thus not see the
wide distribution that today's programs get, because today's programs can
claim a legitimate purpose.

A serial number in the OS removes almost all the inconvenience caused by
modern schemes.  If you had a scheme where you could sell software that
verify's the OS serial number (for 99% of users) or has an optional dongle
(for the 1% that have to move about frequently), you would answer most
problems of inconvenience, and still remind people that they really should
respect the developers of software.

-- 
Brad Templeton, Looking Glass Software Ltd. - Waterloo, Ontario 519/884-7473