From: beame@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca (Carl Beame)
Subject: Re: PC/TCP 2.1 copy protection
Organization: McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 16:01:43 GMT

In article <1992Sep13.124628.23297@tware.com> bash@tware.com (Paul Bash) writes:
>In article <1992Sep12.223938.14081@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca> beame@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca (Carl Beame) writes:
>>
 [stuff deleted]
>
>And what is to stop someone from either 1) patching the binaries to disable
>the "copy protection" or 2) obtaining a non-protected version (as in FTP
>Software's scheme for their site licenses) and then distributing these 
>versions freely? Has copy protection helped you any? No. Has it hampered your
>legit customers? Most definitely. Do you honestly think it will take more than
>a week or so for someone to figure out how to bypass any scheme you can think
>of? 

Fristly, I want to say that B&W doesn't have copy protection, nor do we have 
plans in this area at this time. I'm not going to debate how easy or
difficult any copy protection scheme is to break. I will say that the major
reason that a company like FTP, SUN or B&W (correct me if I'm wrong, SUN & FTP),
is adding copy protection/notification is not to stop the hackers from
breaking the protection and running several copies, but to make companies think
twice about illegaly copying software. In several foreign countries, companies
don't think twice about using a single copy of software on all their machines.
If they require a hacker to break the protection, they would have to consider
their actions and most likely "do the right thing".

There are other countries, like Brazil, where there are no enforced copyright 
laws. What should one do in a case like this? I beleive that Microsoft won't
sell any of it's products there anymore. They have a LARGE lawsuit against the
brazilian government.

>
>This smells of playing to the lowest common denominator. 
>
>>	I will say that even though I don't like copy protection, FTP Software's
>>duplicate copy notification is the best solution I've seen so far. It takes up
>>no extra Network bandwidth and probably a very small amount of memory. It
>>also seems easy to manage.
>>
>
>And were Beame and Whiteside to implement the same scheme would we start
>having problems with conflicting serial numbers between your product and
>FTP Software's on the same net?? What about when the next vendor comes along
>and thinks this is such a great idea and jumps on the band wagon (but of
>course not taking the time to _ensure_ its serial numbers are unique).

	It is not as simple as you are descibing. The ARP packets have a
series of special codes which indicate that it contains an "FTP serial #".
If another company did this, they would choose a different "special code".
Just like ethernet address, vendors must ensure that the special codes
are different. Maybe (I don't know) FTP uses the letters "FTP" and B&W
might use "B&W" ... :-)
 
>
>I sincerely hope B&W do not go this route, because you have been my primary
>alternative to FTP Software's MSDOS product in the consulting I do. It would 
>be a shame to have to search for another alternative.

	As I indicated previously, B&W does not have any protection
scheme and that we have no plans at this time to add one. I should also note
that the pressure to add one is coming from foreign distributors in certain 
countries.
>
>-- 
>Paul Bash                                                   Techware Design 
>bash@tware.com                                              Boulder, CO  U.S.A.

Carl Beame
Beame & Whiteside Software Ltd.
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc