From: tmkk@uiuc.edu (Khan)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Hacking USR ROMS [4.2 - 4.1]
Summary: Long
Date: 13 Oct 92 15:11:48 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana


In article <1992Oct13.041349.6781@riogrande.cs.tcu.edu> panizo@riogrande.cs.tcu.edu (Maria Panizo) writes:
>
>include quoted text:
>
>MHO, use of the HST protocol on products not specifically marketed or
>authorized by USR to do so, deprives them of revenues they are
>legitimately entitled to, and is the equivalent of theft.
>
>end quoted text.
>
>If I didn't intentionally purchase the modem to take advantage of that manuf.
>oversight, there is no intent to defraud involved.  If I do use a modem
>for a purpose that it was not intended, I don't see where USR is harmed,      
>providing they shipped it to me "as is".  It's their error.

Agreed.

I hack on electronic things I buy all the time. I have a Radio Shaft
scanner. When I bought it, it had portions of the 800MHz band locked
out. I went in and modified it so that it could receive the full 800MHz
band. Others have modified theirs to add more channels, extra bands, and
even an interface to allow computer control of the receiver. Is this
illegal? Hardly. Is this robbing Radio Shaft of revenue? I suppose you
could view it that way. After all, by adding RAM to the scanner, instead
of the 400 channels the thing comes with, I can get 800, 1600, 3200, or
even more channels to use. The case could be made that each 400-channel
block of capacity I add to my first scanner robs RS of a sale of another
400 channel scanner. Such a case would probably be laughed out of a real
courtroom, but that's beside the point. ;-)

The same has been true of electronic things for as long as there have
been electronic things. That's why computers have expansion slots and
sockets for extra ROM chips.

I understand why USR would be pissed that their screwup might allow
people to buy a cheaper modem and use it in place of a much more
expensive (IMHO overpriced) model. But calling it illegal is ludicrous.


One other related thought:

If USR's ultra expensive modem is SO SIMILAR to its cheaper Sportster
that all one has to do is change a couple registers in order to
transform one into the other, then USR IS GOUGING ITS CUSTOMERS! Think
about it: It costs USR $X to manufacture a Sportster. USR can sell the
Sportster for $Y and make a profit. The guts of the Sportster and the
HST DS are so similar that their manufacturing costs have to be nearly
identical, as well. So why does the HST DS cost so much more than the
Sportster? Because USR is charging as much as the market will bear.
Capitalism at its best, folks. Milk the cash cow while the milking is
good. Intel does it all the time, like selling 486 chips with the FPU
disabled as 486SX chips at a lower price. USR's only problem is that
they didn't disable the HST DS features of the Sportster well enough,
making it simple for users to re-enable those features. This is not
illegal; this is not a crime; it's not even immoral. This is simply a
screwup on the part of USR. It's like you bought a non-cable-ready TV
and found out after you'd purchased it that the factory accidentally
installed a cable-ready tuner inside the case.

If I thought I could find a Sportster with 4.1 ROMs in it, I might just
buy one for the express purpose of using it as a DS. And I sure wouldn't
hold my breath waiting for the paddy wagons to arrive! I have no doubt,
however, that USR will EVER make this type of mistake again. ;-)