Jump to content


Please note: You can easily log in to MPN using your Facebook account!

Copy Protection


Recommended Posts

There are two things going on in the recording and music world that I hate right now. File sharing and copy protection. I was over a friend's house the other day and saw how many songs he had downloaded without paying for and we got into a debate about it. He pointed out a few times that I could probably even download all those delicious plug-ins that I crave, but don't have the money for. We searched, and sure enough, plug-ins galore. This pissed me off even more. One of the things that always gets me is how software companies put in these copy protection schemes which make it a pain in the ass for me, a paying customer, but the illegal cracked versions are CP free and easy to use. So anyway, I'm sitting around that night and an idea comes to me. File sharing is the wave of the future, evidently, and it will lead to harsher more annoying CP schemes for software. I was also, coincidentally, thinking about viral marketing for my game company (ask me about it sometime...) Then what hit me was a strange idea. Viral Copy Protection. Most software that the CP is kracked is posted somewhere. WHat if companies started to post 'kracked' versions of their software that would royally f-up someone's hard drive or operating system if they tried to use it. Maybe even give them a few days of happiness with their new stolen toy, then BAM! SOL, pirate-boy. You shouldn'ta tried to get away without paying. Of course, this might be able to work for music files and video, too. Then, you remove the copy protection from software, except for maybe a simple serial number interface. Anyway, I know the idea is somewhat loosely formed, and I'm sure that others will point out all the loopholes in it. Plus, it also takes money out of the pockets of the jerky CP programmers and developers. Any thoughts? Drew
Andrew Mazzocchi
Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Replies 5
  • Created
  • Last Reply
I share your frustration with copy protection, but I think that this is the wrong approach. The last thing we need are companies putting out virus like cracks of their own programs. Plus, regardless of who writes the code, any program designed to do damaged to a system is considered a virus and is punishable by law. -Dylan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read a post from a manufacturer rep in one of these forums a year ago that alluded to this virus crack idea being talked about by software companies. I imagine that we haven't heard about it since for the very reason [b]Dylan[/b] gave. It's illegal too. And for good reasons as well. Can you imagine a virus created to damage a hacker's computer that somehow found its way on to an innocent person's computer via legitimate forms of file sharing? It's hard to contain a virus once it's been created. As with both of you, this issue is very frustrating to me. In fact, I created a thread for those who have had [url=http://www.musicplayer.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=2&t=001971]Nightmare Experiences with "Copy Protection"[/url] . I created this topic to gather a collection of stories about "copy protection" gone awry. As you probably know, there are a number of representatives from equipment and software manufactures who read what we say. Most of them seem to care what the user experience is like for their products. This information may help them build a better product. [b]Jeff, TASCAM Guy[/b] is one of those who contributed to that thread stating, "Folks, this thread [b]is[/b] important to us software manufacturers, and we want to know about your perspectives and experiences -- good and bad -- with copy protection. Right now, we're dealing with worldwide piracy of GigaStudio and sound libraries, and every software company is in the same boat. At the same time, we'd like to make our protection efforts as painless as possible for you, the legitimate customers. If you really want to change things for the better, please keep contributing to this thread. I promise to keep listening to you." I found that to be [b]very[/b] encouraging! Perhaps if enough of us are vocal about the pitfalls of various methods of "copy protection," manufacturers will find a better way of coping with this issue.

Enthusiasm powers the world.

 

Craig Anderton's Archiving Article

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What if every computer had a small electromagnetic bomb implanted in the case somewhere and if the proper codes weren't entered during software installation the bomb would go off and destroy every electronic device within a 100 yds. But that's just crazy talk.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pace already implemeted it. If Pace copy protection decides you have cracked software on your system it destroys any floppy disk authorizer you insert. Unfortunately it sometimes gets it wrong and burns all the auths on a perfectly legit system! This has happened to many TDM systems. :rolleyes:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will not buy any product that Pace protection is attached to. I hate the iLok, and just don't understand why people will give up a port, USB or otherwise, for copy protection. I recently saw a post on a mailing list where someone was having a problem with iLok protection, and a manufacturer rep suggested merely buying a USB hub to plug the dongle into. So the manufacturer believes that consumers should be just honky-dory with spending extra money on first the iLok dongle, then a USB hub to make sure it works the right way? Is this progress? I liked the CP for Metric Halo Channel Strip. It registers online and takes a kind of 'snapshot' of your computer's profile. That way, it can only be installed on that machine. Maybe it will cause problems in the future, but for right now... Drew
Andrew Mazzocchi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...