Re: Executing Encrypted Code

At 1:29 PM 12/20/1996, Bill Frantz wrote:
>At 11:52 AM -0800 12/20/96, Peter Hendrickson wrote:
>> If it's worthwhile having a backup processor around, then you just have
>> to spend a little more to have backup software, too.

> I thought your model was cheap processors and expensive software.  I.e.,.
> The cost of the software is greater than the cost of the hardware.  Sounds
> like more than just "a little more".

There's no reason why one software package would cost more than the
machine.  I was assuming you didn't need your whole software library
to finish the report.

I would expect software prices to drop because everybody using the software
would be paying for it.  I would also expect more kinds of software to become
available.

At any rate, I just don't see this as a major problem.  Does anybody
know how often processors break down these days?  My guess is that
it is less common than getting into a car accident and much less common
than all the other factors that make reports late.

If companies started metering software, then this problem pretty much
evaporates.

>> If the old copy protection just worked, it would have been widely accepted.

> Again, there is a complex infrastructure which offers the customer no
> obvious benefit.

The obvious benefit is that when you purchase software you don't have
to pay for software development for the people who don't pay.  Few
people find this objectionable in principle.

It is not out of the question for software vendors to sell two versions
of the same software.  One is the piracy-free version and the other is
the copy-as-much-as-you-can version.  I would expect the piracy-free
version to be substantially cheaper.

(Of course, it is not out of the question that piracy boosts sales by
advertising the product.  We haven't seen a good experiment for
determining this.)

> I disagree that copy protection would have been widely accepted, even had
> it worked smoothly.  In fact, this scheme can be characterized as a scheme
> to make copy protection work.

Your characterization is accurate.  Ignoring the particulars of this
scheme, it would certainly be neat if people could sell software
without it being pirated.

Peter Hendrickson
ph@netcom.com

Peter Hendrickson writes:
>  I would expect software prices to drop because everybody using
>  the software would be paying for it.

I don't mean to sound rude or insult you personally, but this is utterly  
absurd.  If everyone is paying for the software then the company would be  
making even MORE money.  Only a fool would want to make less money!!  If money  
wasn't important to these people they wouldn't be in the business of selling  
software in the first place!

Aside from putting a gun to people's heads, the only thing that lowers prices  
is competition.

>  It is not out of the question for software vendors to sell
>  two versions of the same software.  One is the piracy-free
>  version and the other is the copy-as-much-as-you-can version.
>  I would expect the piracy-free version to be substantially
>  cheaper.

That would render the entire scheme pointless.  It only takes _____ONE_____  
copy of the software to get out for the whole world to pirate it.


andrew

>At 1:29 PM 12/20/1996, Bill Frantz wrote:
>>At 11:52 AM -0800 12/20/96, Peter Hendrickson wrote:
>>> If it's worthwhile having a backup processor around, then you just have
>>> to spend a little more to have backup software, too.
>
>> I thought your model was cheap processors and expensive software.  I.e.,.
>> The cost of the software is greater than the cost of the hardware.  Sounds
>> like more than just "a little more".
>
>There's no reason why one software package would cost more than the
>machine.  I was assuming you didn't need your whole software library
>to finish the report.
>
>I would expect software prices to drop because everybody using the software
>would be paying for it.  I would also expect more kinds of software to become
>available.

I doubt it- if everyone has no choice but to pay, why would software companies
lower prices? What would happen is a) less pirated software floating
around, and
b) software companies make much more money. I don't see prices coming down.

>At any rate, I just don't see this as a major problem.  Does anybody
>know how often processors break down these days?  My guess is that
>it is less common than getting into a car accident and much less common
>than all the other factors that make reports late.

It doesn't have to break.

Example: Advertising agency, each designer's machine has at least $10k worth
of software on it. We upgrade the machine, we have to spend another $10k to
buy new software, or go through administrative hassle with the vendor to
get 'new' copies of the software?

Speaking from a Sysadmin's perspective, I wouldn't use one if you gave me
the hardware for free. With this scheme, the programmers benefit, the
end-users don't, and it's the end-users who have to buy into this for it
to work.

[snip]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

On Fri, 20 Dec 1996 aaron@herringn.com wrote:

> >At 1:29 PM 12/20/1996, Bill Frantz wrote:

... stuff deleted ...

> >I would expect software prices to drop because everybody using the software
> >would be paying for it.  I would also expect more kinds of software to become
> >available.
> 
> I doubt it- if everyone has no choice but to pay, why would software companies
> lower prices? What would happen is a) less pirated software floating
> around, and
> b) software companies make much more money. I don't see prices coming down.
> 

You should expect software companies to make more money and for prices to
come down.  Remember, there's not just one software company.  This scheme
would force some of the people who would copy software to buy it,
increasing the profits to the software companies.  So, why would the price
come down?  Well, because of the increased profit margin, there is now
room for the price to come down, and since there is competition among
software companies, at least one of them will lower prices for the
advantage it will give them.  The others will have to follow.


>
... rest deleted ...
> 

- --------------------
Scott V. McGuire <svmcguir@syr.edu>
PGP key available at http://web.syr.edu/~svmcguir
Key fingerprint = 86 B1 10 3F 4E 48 75 0E  96 9B 1E 52 8B B1 26 05



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3i
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBMrtORd7xoXfnt4lpAQFNkwP+PJ8qq267S15H51i8dGqBFZEp2SC13+Xo
4h95n2fsunSWK/hQbmEXF8wZXabDqqXqRbCYh0ZZZy5Xz74vNoI4HaKsArs+dTgW
+Iu5EYM1cEK8Ncrr0o6kQSPiNproNZ944AuzD11X9vKMRAkxkxPD98XeBXn6SOFK
EAgm6Z0d9Cg=
=RiYt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On Fri, 20 Dec 1996 14:28:49 -0800, Peter Hendrickson wrote:

   I would expect software prices to drop because everybody using the software
   would be paying for it.  I would also expect more kinds of software to become
   available.

What ever happened to charging what the market will bear?  Why would
they voluntarily drop their prices just because the software can't be
pirated?

-- 
Paul Foley <mycroft@actrix.gen.nz>       ---         PGPmail preferred

	   PGP key ID 0x1CA3386D available from keyservers
    fingerprint = 4A 76 83 D8 99 BC ED 33  C5 02 81 C9 BF 7A 91 E8
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cat, n.:
	Lapwarmer with built-in buzzer.

On Fri, 20 Dec 1996, Peter Hendrickson wrote:

> (Of course, it is not out of the question that piracy boosts sales by
> advertising the product.  We haven't seen a good experiment for
> determining this.)

There's this little game called "Doom" that was released for free a few
years back.  pay your $$$ and you got to continue the game.  A couple hot
shot programmers in Texas apparently made quite a bit of money off of this.
Of course, the game was top-notch for its time


> Your characterization is accurate.  Ignoring the particulars of this
> scheme, it would certainly be neat if people could sell software
> without it being pirated.

They can.  Models such as the one above and free software provide one
alternative.  Companies make their money on a value added basis and from
corporations willing to pay proper license fees.  

Placing the kind of limitations you are envisioning upon hardware would be
ultimately harmful to the growth of an industry which has always relied on
innovation from "amateurs" on the outside of commercial circles.  
Furthermore, quality free applications and shareware applications
represent a challenge to commercial firms to produce better software that
customers are willing to pay for.  

me
_______________________________________________________________
 Omegaman <mailto:omega@bigeasy.com> 
  PGP Key fingerprint = 6D 31 C3 00 77 8C D1 C2
                        59 0A 01 E3 AF 81 94 63 
 Send e-mail with "get key" in the "Subject:" 
 field to get a copy of my public key
_______________________________________________________________