🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Aug1.191738.5701@metrosoft.com> gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen) writes:
>In article <1992Jul31.194615.24025@cs.yale.edu>  
>nathan@laplace.biology.yale.edu (Nathan F. Janette) writes:
>> 
[Mathematica copy-protection nightmare deleted]
>> 
>
>Speaking as a company that is reluctantly considering copy-protecting one  
>of our products, I'd like to know if end-users find any of the current  
>schemes truly acceptable. We've been weighing the pros and cons of  
>registering to a username or machine ID. Neither seens completely  
>acceptable to us. 
>
>What do you folks think?
>

Copy protection.  Ugh.

Usually it's a nuisance.  Sometimes, its downright infuriating.

Network license counters and lock/unlock keys usually are the best,
but the ones that lock onto username or machine ID are horrendous.

The problems usually crop up during the tightest of times.

"Oh, we can't show you that cool software because we brought
only the hard drive and not the machine for this demo"

If the copy protection software restricted only to book type licenses,
then things would be fine.  Machine ID and username locking doesn't.

I know users who won't buy copy-protected software now, after being
bitten by it too many times.  However, it seems that most of the NeXT
software out there is now protected.

Argh.