Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

A History of Copy Protection

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on Mon Jun 09, 2008 04:30 PM
from the you-can-never-have-too-many-secret-decoder-rings dept.
GamerGirll1138 writes to tell us Next-gen has an amusing walk down memory lane with their history of copy protection. There have been some crazy schemes over the years to ensure that you paid for your software, everything from super-secret decoder rings to ridiculous document checks. "With bandwidth expanding and more and more games publishers exploring digital distribution, there's little doubt that we're entering a new phase in the history of copy protection and those who would defeat it. What's more, the demand for games as a chosen form of entertainment has never been higher. All this considered, it's impossible to believe that the cat-and-mouse game of piracy and copy protection will not reach new levels of intensity, with new technologies deployed on each side, and that some of them will surely create new hurdles for even those who simply wish to purchase and play the newest games. Ah, for the heady days of the code wheel."
+ -
story

Related Stories

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by Kneo24 (688412) on Monday June 09 2008, @04:32PM (#23716023) Homepage
    it doesn't treat me like some criminal. I don't want my software to stop working because I had no internet access, and I now have to go out of my way and call technical support. I don't want my software to install root-kits on my PC because it thinks I might be a pirate. I don't want copy protection to be less useful than the pirated version. And so on and so forth.
    • by "so on and so forth", you of course mean a pony, right?
    • So you have problems with any copy protection, as long as it exclusively relies on "trust". Because of course copy-protection must raise hassels. There is some method of verifying you can run the software, and such methods can never be 100% accurate (there are lemons/shorts/ruination/reformats/internet outages/etc).

      The only other alternative would be a locked down OS (far moreso than Vista) with some sort of anti-modding hardware and a hypervisor. Even that would only mostly work, but it would work well enough to eliminate any other inconviences.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        I thought some of the examples I gave would explain my position more clearly. It appears that I'm wrong.

        I realize all copy protection in some manner treats you like a criminal. I start having issues when it becomes obtrusive to my ability to play a game or use some software.

        I think STEAM is fine. Even if I have no Internet access, I can still play the game as long as I have installed the game.

        I think CD keys are fine. It comes with the game. If I lose the key, that's my fault. The game still theoretic

        • Steam is not fine (Score:5, Interesting)

          by LingNoi (1066278) on Monday June 09 2008, @06:47PM (#23717613)
          Steam is fine from a copy protection point of view, it's when they start disabling accounts of those who bought their game in Thailand to get it cheaper where I draw the line.

          Some consumers who purchased Valve's Orange Box from vendors located outside of their home country--mainly in an attempt to save on cheaper products--have recently reported that their otherwise legally-obtained games have since been deactivated by Valve's Steam software for territory violation. Talking with Shacknews, Valve's Doug Lombardi now says that the Steam software is merely carrying out this function by design. "Valve uses Steam for territory control to make sure products authorized for use in certain territories are not being distributed and used outside of those territories," said Lombardi.

          "In this case, a Thai website was selling retail box product keys for Thailand to people outside of Thailand. Since those keys are only for use in Thailand, people who purchased product keys from the Thai website are not able to use those product keys in other territories." So are users who bought the game outside of their own country completely out of luck? It appears so, as Lombardi recommends purchasing a legal copy from a local shop in order to keep playing. "Some of these users have subsequently purchased a legal copy after realizing the issue and were having difficulty removing the illegitimate keys from their Steam accounts," added Lombardi. "Anyone having this problem should contact Steam Support to have the Thai key removed from their Steam account."

          This really sucks for me as I travel to and from Thailand all the time. What do they expect? I buy the orange box in every damn country?!
          • by stbill79 (1227700) on Tuesday June 10 2008, @07:03AM (#23723327)
            Completely off topic, but it is just another example of pseudo globalization - basically where the corporation gets to use the rest of the world to suit its motives, while not allowing the consumer the same opportunities. You can be damn sure that Valve has used cheap developers, manufacturing, and other benefits of the third world - all at the expense of Western workers. But when it comes time for the consumer to take advantage of the cheaper products in those same third world countries - forget it, our license forbids that...
            • by andi75 (84413) on Tuesday June 10 2008, @05:41AM (#23722521) Homepage
              > You're fine as long as you buy the game from the region you say you're in.

              That's exactly the same stupid reasoning that's used for the #$^%&£! DVD region codes. If I buy a DVD on my vacation in the states, I can't watch it on my player at home, without going through some extra hassles.

              Vendors should have no right to put ANY export restrictions on stuff they sell. If they want to play in globally, they should accept their customers may want too...
        • by bit01 (644603) on Monday June 09 2008, @09:00PM (#23718635)

          If I lose the key, that's my fault.

          No, it's a deliberate game breakage by the vendor. It's crippleware. It's only human to lose things, particularly things as ephemeral and meaningless as a license number, and to pretend it never happens is dishonest. Your game will die.

          The game still theoretically works.

          "In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. But, in practice, there is." ~ Jan L. A. van de Snepscheut/Yogi Berra.

          Ownership is, by definition, the right to control. If the vendor controls it then you don't own it.

          ---

          DRM'ed content breaks the copyright bargain, the first sale doctrine and fair use provisions. It should not be possible to copyright DRM'ed content.

          • by mpe (36238) on Tuesday June 10 2008, @04:34AM (#23722099)
            Companies that care about their customers won't fault you for losing something. If someone buys my game 10 years ago, loses their key, forgets their email address and forgets when they bought it, and formats their PC they can STILL get a fresh copy of the game just by emailing me and proving they are the guy/gal in my database by knowing stuff like their full name and address.
            If I can do that as a one man company, why can't all games companies?


            Because the smaller the company the more they tend to care about not annoying their customers.
      • So, a console?
      • by twistedcubic (577194) on Monday June 09 2008, @05:39PM (#23716843)
        Here's an example. I bought Maple 6 around five years ago. The retail box had a penguin on it, and advertised that it works on Linux. Cool. $140. No problem. So I get home, install it, and find out I have to get a license from Maple to run it. I go to the website, and later find out that the license is for Windows only. So I call Maplesoft, repeatedly, and after about a week I finally get a response. Pretty frustrating, but hey, in the grand scheme of things, a week is not a long time.

        Several months later, after swapping a bad CDROM drive and upgrading RAM, the license key no longer works. So I call Maplesoft, again, and go through the same stupid hassle. The tech FINALLY gave me a machine-agnostic license after all the other crap she tried didn't work. If I had known, I would have asked for one in the first place.

        Adding insult to injury, I had some outrageous charges on my phone bills because I didn't realize calling Canada carried "international calling" surcharges.

        In the end, I didn't find Maple as useful as I expected. So the moral: I'll be more careful about spending money on proprietary software in the future.
    • by dhavleak (912889) on Monday June 09 2008, @05:03PM (#23716407)

      it doesn't treat me like some criminal. I don't want my software to stop working because I had no internet access
      I feel for the publishers as much as I do for the consumers. Without copy-protection its just too easy for people to rip-off the publishers. I think for people without net-access, phone-in activation is a decent substitute.

      I admit I didn't read the article, but for every new and ridiculous height publishers go to for copy-protection, there a new and ridiculous height that crackers go to, to break the protection and then they put the results on bittorrent.

      I think it's another case where the law woefully lags behind technology. There need to laws (urgently) protecting consumer rights when copy-protection is applied, just like there's the DMCA which helps publishers go after people who circumvent their protections (helps a little too much).

      The point being, once the law makes it clear what copy protection can and cannot do, then at least the publishers have guidelines to work with and can go to town with copy protections but still not trample on our rights.

      I especially think the "treating us as criminals" arguments is given way more weight than it's really worth. I mean, does anybody have a better idea about how to validate s/w as being legally purchased other than using some product activation mechanism (whether it works over the phone or net?)

        • by dhavleak (912889) on Monday June 09 2008, @05:36PM (#23716805)

          I don't feel for the publishers at all. Their software is an infinite good.. it doesn't make sense to charge for copies when it costs a penny to press a disk and costs a hundredth of that to offer it for download.

          Strongly disagreed

          It doesn't matter that it takes 1 cent to press a disk. How much did it cost to make the software, and how many disks did you sell? If your development cost was 10 million dollars, and you sold 10 million copies, you would have to charge at least $10 per disk to break even -- simple math.

          It doesn't matter that it's an infinite good either, and that at $10 per copy, every sale after 10 million is profits. They are still entitled to think that they are providing you with a product/service that is worth at least $10 and that is what they ask you to pay them for it. Easy example is a $50 game that you spend one month playing for about an hour a day -- it's not an unreasonable price to ask -- if a customer isn't willing to pay that price, they shouldn't buy the game. If consumers show a trend of "getting the game by hook or by crook", then the publisher will add copy-protections.

          It's really that simple -- it comes down to simple human nature. As long as there exists theft / shrink / infringement (whatever you wanna call it), there will be copy-protection. It's up to the govt./courts to step in and define our (consumer's) rights clearly to make sure our rights don't get trampled on by these copy-protection mechanisms.

        • by mpeskett (1221084) on Monday June 09 2008, @06:25PM (#23717373)
          I've become convinced that the best protection against piracy is to get your customers to like you.

          Via Steam I've bought legit copies of Half Life 2 and the 2 episodes after having started playing a pirated copy because I decided I actually wanted to throw them some money for a quality game. I know Steam has some kind of protection, but it completely stays out of my face. I don't have to type anything in or remember to not lose a CD key... it just downloads and there it is.

          Other companies that make you jump through more hoops in order to access games that interest me less, and don't respond to criticism - instead doing the whole "faceless corporation" thing... they can go take a long walk off a short pier. Fuck them. If I can bypass their protection then I will, because I god honestly do not care about them.

          So yeah, if you want people to not pirate your games, make it so they want to pay you (There was another article I saw before about ways to add value beyond the media/content itself so that you're actually offering a better product than the free pirated copy, doing things that way works too). If you try and make it so they *have* to pay you, it won't work and they'll hate you and pirate your stuff just to spite you. The End.
  • by nurb432 (527695) on Monday June 09 2008, @04:33PM (#23716045) Homepage Journal
    Quality product at a reasonable price.

    • by snl2587 (1177409) on Monday June 09 2008, @04:55PM (#23716323)

      Quality product at a reasonable price.

      ...and completely without copy protection. I can honestly say that I have only gotten cracks for games I already own a full license to, but I would have never needed to if the games hadn't been virtually padlocked with a faulty key.

      I bet a lack of copy protection would also lower the number of calls to tech support as well.

      • by Jesus_666 (702802) on Monday June 09 2008, @06:52PM (#23717663)
        Reasonable copy protection is fine, too. Ambrosia Software games require a license key to be unlocked. License keys are validated online and time-limited so they invalidate quickly in case they are leaked - but if your key expires you can simply enter your data in their registration program and they give you a new one. As long as you have purchased the game from them you can always request a new key.

        The result is that I feel good about buying from them. Their copy protection scheme is reasonable, it's not much of a hassle (once games are registered they get a machine-specific file saying that they are - no further online checks neccessary) and if I should lose all my data I can just download the game again and request a new license key. That last part makes the scheme almost look like a service.

        Very acceptable, very reasonable and not insulting like StarForce et al. Of course it might not work for high-profile companies as people would release cracks, but for small-to-medium sized companies I think this scheme is much superior compared to the nonsense other companies come up with.
    • by arotenbe (1203922) on Monday June 09 2008, @04:57PM (#23716347) Journal
      I'd say the ultimate copy protection would be an awful, expensive product. On the other hand, it doesn't seem to be working for the music industry...
  • The submission touches on the real problem, that this epic battle between companies and the freeriders eventually ends up affecting normal people more than really preventing copying. I have friends who are avid gamers but actually end up pirating the games they buy because it's too difficult to deal with the copy protection crap.

    On the other hand I think this will eventually reach a breaking point and these normal people (who are the paying customers) will stop putting up with said crap. That will be an interesting development for sure.

    • by Doctor_Jest (688315) on Monday June 09 2008, @04:48PM (#23716223)
      Some have stopped putting up with it, but the resultant decline in sales is attributed to piracy, rather than a fed up customer.
    • Re:The real problem (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Petrushka (815171) on Monday June 09 2008, @04:55PM (#23716319)

      I have friends who are avid gamers but actually end up pirating the games they buy because it's too difficult to deal with the copy protection crap.

      I'm sure there's nothing unusual about that. The very first thing I do when I buy a game, even before installing -- and preferably before buying, too -- is to stop off at gamecopyworld and/or gameburnworld to make sure that there's a crack that I can apply to my legitimate (and patched) copy. It's a trend that will only continue.

      I've already had experiences of electronics shops pointing to me to instructions on how to "crack" a DVD player to make it multi-region, how to unlock phones, and so on. I'm sure it won't be too long before we see game shops doing similar things; games will catch up eventually.

      On the other hand I think this will eventually reach a breaking point and these normal people (who are the paying customers) will stop putting up with said crap.

      That I doubt, unfortunately. As the article shows, people have been putting up with copy-prevention schemes since the advent of commercial computer software (in fact the article doesn't start nearly early enough). Some of those schemes have been much more burdensome than present-day ones -- though they're getting worse again, with "activate every time you start the game"-type schemes.

  • Aw man, you mean that secret decoder was just a copy protection scheme? And I wasn't really saving the world? That's it! I was in support of RIAA/MPAA/BSA before but now they've just wrecked my childhood fantasy! I'm going to go poke an eye out and buy a parrot!
  • by bigattichouse (527527) on Monday June 09 2008, @04:37PM (#23716081) Homepage
    I remember the Ultima book back when a laser copy was expensive. The colors were pastels, which wouldn't copy on the copy machines of the day, so to pirate the game, you had to spend about as much in color copies as buying the darn thing. Course, I had a friend whose dad's office had a copier... ahh. smell the piracy.
    • by v1 (525388) on Monday June 09 2008, @04:47PM (#23716219) Homepage Journal
      The trick there was bleach. Bleach would strip the color off the paper but not the ink. So it would turn a print that was for example, grey ink on dark red paper (which would B&W copy to a sheet of black paper) into a tannish/reddish/white sheet of paper, and black lettering, easily photocopied.

      Anyone remember MordorCharge?

  • by BadAnalogyGuy (945258) <BadAnalogyGuy@gmail.com> on Monday June 09 2008, @04:37PM (#23716087)
    Amusing is sending those of us who actually RTFA to the LAST page of a 4 page article. This article is the straight man in a comedy duo, only without the funny man. That's sort of amusing in an ironic way.

    Just think, without copy protection, we wouldn't have been able to distribute our viruses so easily. With all these kids trying to download cracks from any site that offered them, our bits have gone far and wide.

    Thanks copy protection!
  • Oh man, I remember moving up from the Commodore 64 to the Mac LC. Because 90% of the C64 software we had was "Load 'n Go" stuff for $1 (literally!) there wasn't much worry about copy protection. I can't remember a single thing we had on that system that had copy protection. The Mac however did have some surprises. We actually sent our first copy of SimCity back to Maxis because we didn't realize that the Red Card with the weird symbols was important and that strange dialog box (I was like 10 at the time, gimme a break) at the start was also important. I thought it was broken because every time you started the game it would throw disasters at your city constantly. The tech support guys were apparently trained to treat anybody asking about the copy protection like a theif, and never bothered to tell us what we had to do either (hence the useless return). Luckily, I figured it out with the second copy (unpacking the box myself instead of letting my brother do it and finding the red card made a big difference).

    Later on I played Chris Crawford's (I think that was his name) Patton Strikes Back. This one was interesting it that it let you run about halfway through the game, and then stopped and asked "are your papers in order"? It then directed you to a specific page in the manual and had you type in a specific word (third word on the second paragraph for instance). There was a slight problem though, the manual had apparently been revised a bit after the copy protection was put in place, so about 5-10% of the time, your game would be destroyed halfway through because it failed the copy check. That was after we got AOL and it was my first foray into piracy, as getting halfway through a tough game and then losing because the copy protection was buggy was a real outrage. This was the days before games released patches, so as far as I know unless you crack the thing there's always a chance of losing the war because of the copy protection.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      I had the same problem with Pirates! on the Amiga. I think inputting names to pirate photos was the copy protection scheme that occured at the start of the game. If you failed to enter the correct names, the game would be ultra-hard with lots of English frigates and Spaniards hunting you while your crew would mutiny. I never figured it out but managed to do quite well at the game never the less.

      My favorite copy protection scheme was Simon the Sorcerers. It had a set of sprites, hats, cats, brooms and so on

  • Copy Restriction (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Virtex (2914) on Monday June 09 2008, @04:40PM (#23716127) Homepage
    We should call it what it is - copy restricton. It doesn't protect your copy nor your ability to copy. I could understand if it were called copyright protection, but that's just not the case.
    • by corsec67 (627446) on Monday June 09 2008, @04:48PM (#23716233) Homepage Journal
      Many of these schemes can't prevent copying data, like CSS, online authentication or dongles, so they try to prevent execution.

      Even when used legitimately, a computer is going to make at least one copy of the program/data, first into main memory, then into the various levels of caches.
  • by Wiseblood1 (1135095) on Monday June 09 2008, @04:47PM (#23716217)
    DONT DONT DONT COPY THAT FLOPPY! http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4837609090332617729 [google.com]
  • It wasn't very effective as copy protection, but the game had an awesome add-in as it immersed you into the world of arcaheology and adventure:

    Henry Jones' Grail Diary.

    It was in a nice leather-like enclosure, and the paper had a parchment texture. There were lots of pictures with clips and notes addeds, all written by hand.

    The copy protection part was a series of descriptions of the Grail according to various authors - which were referenced by Indy as he investigated various items.

    BTW, in the LucasArts' adventure games, a trimmed down copy of the grail diary was included only for the copy protection. But it wasn't as good as the original.

    As an Indy fan, I would buy the original Last Crusade game again *JUST* for the Grail Diary.
    • by Bieeanda (961632) on Monday June 09 2008, @05:28PM (#23716707)
      That reminds me of my favourite bit of copy protection. It was so elegant, I didn't even realize that it was more than just a bit of box fluff. Ultima 5 came with a whack of little things-- a symbol of infinity, a cloth map, a nice in-character manual describing creatures and spells and whatnot... and a narrow scroll that described the voyage of Lord British into the newly discovered Underworld, and his subsequent kidnapping by the Shadowlords.

      Imagine my surprise when I stumbled across the entrance to the Underworld that they used, and found myself able to trace LB's path all the way to the great chamber where his fallen companions still lay. Without that miniature walkthrough, and one page in the manual, with one line of musical notation, written as apparently nothing more than a window on Britannian culture, I'd have never been able to finish the game.

      Unfortunately the later games abandoned that completely. The documentation checks were all at the beginning of the game, and all referred to the bestiary, or lines of latitude and longitude on one of the included maps. What had once been pleasantly immersive (and a dirty, dirty trick on a cheap pirate) turned into a challenge and response to prove that you were the heroic Avatar. Kind of says something about the shift in the relationship between player and developer.

  • by JohnnyGTO (102952) on Monday June 09 2008, @04:53PM (#23716299) Homepage
    Vault Corp. what a product. Actually it was ingenious, even if your 5 1/4 disk wore out the little mark would register with the copy protection software. All you needed to do was swap out the back up disks with the original. I hear at Comdex a certain individual told a certain hacker what he would unleash with the next update a worm on anyone that broke the protection scheme. Company was closed about 6 months later.
    • by Deadstick (535032) on Monday June 09 2008, @07:12PM (#23717855)
      That was the ProLok disk. It had a spot on it that had been heated with a laser, enough to fuse some of the oxide. The result was a small amount of disk space that could be read but not altered. The copy-check consisted of writing all zeroes to that area; verifying all zeroes; writing all ones; and verifying all ones. A disk with the laser spot would always produce at least one compare error.

      The routine was hidden inside a really lame obfuscation scheme. It would read a section of encrypted code from the disk, XOR it byte by byte with a byte selected from a table, and store it in RAM. Then it would select another byte from the table and do the XOR again. And again, thirty or forty times. Each cycle would begin by altering the single-step and breakpoint interrupt vectors to point to an exit instruction.

      If you went to the trouble of tracing your way down through all that, you were rewarded with a delicious irony: the ProLok disk was, itself, a copyright infringement. In order to do the write/read checks they had to insert hooks into the BIOS -- but that was not so easy in the small-RAM days when the BIOS executed directly from ROM instead of being shadowed out into RAM. Vault had to make its own BIOS, and did it by (drum roll) copying IBM's (rimshot). And they made an absurdly lame attempt to cover it up: they took some 800 bytes of the IBM Fixed Disk BIOS, added their hooks, then went through it and interchanged logical-shift-left and arithmetic-shift-left instructions wherever the MSB and carry were guaranteed to be zero (meaning both instructions did the same thing). So, disassemblies of the two BIOSes would look a LITTLE different...

      Oh, the crack? A two-byte change on the disk, probably a back door they forgot to remove. Compuserve was the central clearinghouse for cracks in those days, and picked it up within a week.

      AFAIK Vault's only client was Ashton-Tate, who used it on dBase III. The president of Vault was a guy with a law-enforcement background and a SWAT team mentality who fancied himself a mighty crime fighter, and when he was embarrassed by the quick crack, he boasted they were developing ProLok Plus, which would punish crackers by physically damaging the machine. Business customers were enraged, Ashton-Tate dumped Vault (which was expensive because they owned a one-third interest in it), and Vault was no more.

      rj
  • An extremely useless article even by slashdot standards, but I remember two copy protection schemes that sucked even more:

    Lenslock [wikipedia.org] - used by a few 80s home computer games. I'm fairly certain it might have been a UK-only thing. It was horrible. You had to fold this crappy bit of plastic a certain way and hold it over a part of the screen. If you were lucky, and your TV wasn't too large or too small, you might be able to make out the decoded letters which you had to type in.

    And then one we used at work: Parallel port dongles [wikipedia.org]. I used to work in electronic CAD and all the software used this, the result being you needed 5 or more dongles all plugged in at the same time to do any useful work. In the end we got someone in the workshop build a kind of "dongle motherboard" where you could plug in multiple dongles more conveniently than having them hang out the back of the machine, and more importantly pull them out to swap between machines.

    Happy days ... No, actually sucky days. I'm glad I use almost completely free software now.

    Rich.

      • by Bazman (4849) on Tuesday June 10 2008, @03:01AM (#23721483) Journal
        A lot of these speccy games that used randomly generated lookup codes (either in a book or lenslok) could be beaten by poking the frame counter to zero before loading the game. Random numbers on the speccy were generated from the frame counter - it was pretty much the only source of entropy on the box[1]. So if you did:

          POKE 23762,0; POKE 23763,0; POKE 23764,0; LOAD "" [2]

        then, since interrupts were disabled during LOAD, the random number generator would always pick the same one (or possibly two in edge cases) 'random' example. So you only had to copy this one down to pass to your friends along with your C60 cassette.

          I'm not sure if other sources of entropy were available. I vaguely recall the Z80's IR register looking rather random, and maybe you could get noise out of the cassette input... Happy days...

        Barry

        [1] The real source of entropy they relied on was the time between the computer starting and the user typing LOAD "".
        [2] I looked this up - I don't remember it being 3 bytes, but the internet doesn't lie.
  • by MaWeiTao (908546) on Monday June 09 2008, @04:59PM (#23716359)
    I remember copy protection from the days of 5 1/4 inch floppy disks, back when I'd have to boot off the game disk to play. The drive would start grinding like crazy before the game finally started. I never experienced problems but I recall hearing that the copy protection was taxing on the drive and could damage it.

    This prevented someone from just copying the files on the disk directly. But there was an application that just copied the image and got around that nonsense.

    Things haven't really changed. I don't understand why they just don't give up. This has been repeated many times, but it's true. All they're doing is inconveniencing consumers who actually paid for the product.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 09 2008, @05:02PM (#23716397)

    I think we're pretty reasonable.

    The software can be downloaded and trialed for 30 days. After that time, it locks out. Could you set your system clock back 30 days? Sure. Do we really care too much? No. If you want to keep your system out of sync by a month just to avoid paying us, you are a doofus.

    If you want a license, there are many types available. Our software views documents. You can license an entire web server to serve documents to our viewer, and it will view them. You can get a LAN license which locks to a hostname which allows you to install the software on a file server, and anybody running the software off that server is licensed. If you change hostnames, You can even buy a utility that allows you to embed a license inside a document, so that anybody with a free copy of the viewer can view that particular document.

    The license is protected with some simple ciphering. Could it be broken? Sure. Could the host locking be broken? Sure. We don't really care too much. The license is there to keep people from accidentally installing the software on more than one file server. If you want to do it deliberately, you need to set both hosts to the same hostname. Or figure out how to hack the encryption. We don't delude ourselves into thinking this is impossible. To our knowledge, nobody has bothered. If somebody came up with a keygen and put it out on the Internet, we'd be pissed. But our response would probably be to switch to another cipher. If our software was suddenly so popular as to inspire some cracker to write a keygen, my first response would probably be "Cool beans."

    None of the licensing mechanisms are onerous. It doesn't "phone home." It doesn't expire silently. If you want to extend your eval, we are happy to work with you.

    We prefer to sell our software by providing quality. If it's not worth the $XXX to you, then either you don't have a legitimate use, or our price is too high. But we're not going to treat our legit customers like criminals just to get that extra 1% in licensing.

  • The irony... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by damburger (981828) on Monday June 09 2008, @05:06PM (#23716443)
    ...is that the people who are described as the good guys in this article are the ones who want to control your computer, and even more they refer to those wanting to choose what to do with their own computers as 'crackers'
  • by Doc Ruby (173196) on Monday June 09 2008, @05:14PM (#23716525) Homepage Journal
    I remember in the 1980s when game vendors started burning bad sectors into Atari 400/800 floppies on which they distributed their products. Their game's loader SW would try to read those sectors and abort if they weren't unreadable, thinking that pirates couldn't replicate them with just diskdup SW.

    The Atari 810 floppy drive [wikipedia.org] (the highest density storage available, like a 1TB HD is now, and the only game in town other than ridiculous tape drives, except for the extremely rare and stratospherically expensive 5MB Corvus HD) had a little potentiometer in its circuitboard controlling timing of the eletromagnetic signal waveform sent to the write head, that could be turned out of calibration to deliberately write a bad sector. So pirates would map the original's bad sector list, then copy the good sectors, then detune the pot, then write to the list of bad sectors - ruining them, then retune the pot and boot the copy.

    Sure, that's pretty complex, voids the floppy warranty, and intimidates a lot of potential pirates. So instead, some people just stuck a disklabel to the edge of the target floppy, left the label sticking out of the drive, and grabbed that tab to jiggle the floppy while writing to each of the bad sectors - ruining them. Presto!

    Besides, the pro pirates had the same mass floppy duplicators with the same programmable "write bad sector" circuitry that the original game vendors had, so the large, commercial pirates weren't fazed (pun intended ;) one bit (gotcha again >:P), but lots of honest people couldn't back up their games (which were sensitive to all kinds of transient EM, like paperclip collector magnets on desktops), and the vendors spent valuable time and money on worthless copy protection.

    In fact, beating the copy protection was often more fun than the game. So around the world people were working to beat it, even if they never played the game again, but gave copies to friends just to show how ubergeek they were.

    This cat & mouse game is in fact the exact model for all SW copy protection. It's become only a worse value waste for the SW producers, especially in content. They should use their only advantage, their earlier possession of the SW/content, to make big bucks at the first release, just like Hollywood does for movie premiere big weekends. Then let the pirates do their distribution work for free, and charge for support, customization, and subscriptions to upgrades. And build brands to sell their future releases.

    Because "Don't Copy That Floppy" has been a losing battle, long before people would say "what's a floppy?"
  • The Arms Race (Score:3, Interesting)

    by xrayspx (13127) on Monday June 09 2008, @05:15PM (#23716535) Homepage
    I loved being the 7834th person to figure out how to crack Psygnosis titles back in the Atari ST days. Not that I cared about being able to copy the games, they were available anywhere, but just to figure out how to get around the hurdle.

    Back then every game was like buying two games, one that they wanted you to play, and one that they didn't want you to play, the "figure out how to copy it" game. I was never really any good at the cracking-the-game game, but it was interesting and fun anyway.
  • DO NOT WANT (Score:3, Interesting)

    by ewhac (5844) on Monday June 09 2008, @05:20PM (#23716599) Homepage Journal
    You know, I used to really enjoy playing Team Fortress Classic under the old Half-Life engine. Even the occasional cheater would provide some amusement. Then Valve jammed Steam down everyone's throat, and suddenly I couldn't play anymore. Because I refused to install Steam.

    I think I'd enjoy playing Half-Life 2. But I won't install Steam. Same deal for Portal; looks like enormous fun. But I will not install Steam.

    You seeing a trend here?

    Valve is leaving at least $120 retail on the table. I am paying for entertainment. I am not paying for remote monitoring. I can look after my own machines, thank you. All Valve has to do is delete the Steam requirement, and they can have my money.

    Schwab

  • by Dan667 (564390) on Monday June 09 2008, @05:28PM (#23716711)
    rev1: fail
    rev2: fail
    rev3: fail
    rev4: fail
    rev5: fail
    rev6: fail
    current: seeing what happens (fingers crossed!)
  • Kings Quest III (Score:5, Interesting)

    by AdamTrace (255409) on Monday June 09 2008, @05:33PM (#23716773)
    From the article: "Perhaps the most notorious example of this method is Sierra's King's Quest III, in which lengthy passages of potion recipes and other information had to be reproduced from the manual. One typo, and you were greeted with a "Game Over" screen."

    I never viewed this as "copy protection", as such. If it was, I thought it brilliantly played into the actual game.

    The spot in the game is where you're creating a potion or magical item. You needed to follow the directions PRECISELY, or the spell would backfire. I remember typing VERY slowly and carefully, doublechecking everything. It really enhanced the experience of the game, for me.

    If it was meant purely as copy protection, I thought it actually ADDED something to the game.

    Adman
  • by RexDevious (321791) on Monday June 09 2008, @05:41PM (#23716859) Homepage Journal
    E-Books *should* have been the first victims of internet piracy, simply because they were the smallest, and all the content was just good ol' plain text. Ever wonder why it's a hell of a lot easier to get a pirate copy of a whole DVD than it is to get one of a non-Guttenberged E-Book?

    One reason may be the incredibly elegant system of copy protection they used. You unlock the book with 2 pieces of information - the name and credit card number you used to buy the book. Now... someone might not think twice about throwing up a bunch of serialz out to the general public; but publishing their name and credit card number to a site that caters to thieves? Kinda loses it's appeal.

    Maybe I'm missing something here. Maybe people don't mind that e-books cost just the same as their paper counterparts. Maybe computer geeks would rather lug around paper versions of Cryptonomicon than read it off their PDA's, or iPhones. Maybe someone's already cracked the .pdb e-book format, and I just haven't run across it despite having found dozens of ways of cracking movies and software.

    If so - let me know. I'd love to transfer my existing e-book collection into plain text, or possibly loan copies of some titles to people I wouldn't necessarily trust my credit card number with. I can give copies to my mum, and she could give the same copy to someone else - but she'd have to give them all my credit card info for them to read it which makes her much more discerning.

    There are other little aspects to it as well - take a look at how e-books are sold to see why they aren't pirated and see if you think it could be applied to larger software offerings.
    • A couple of problems with that.

      First off, it's no big deal to snoop USB, [google.com] which makes dongles pretty easy to crack.

      You have to petition the USB folks so you get a unique vendor's ID, which is a pain. Plus, they are finite. [driveragent.com]

      You'd have to get Microsoft to give you a digital certificate to make your dongle driver legit - also a pain. And you'd have to go through a driver installation just to load your software, more of a pain.

      Finally, dongle bound software is just as crackable with a monitor. There ha

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      But with USB there's absolutely no way I can tell the difference between a dongle, and a bit of software that attaches to the USB chain. Or a single uber-dongle that emulates an number of other dongles after cloning from the original/loading a saved config. With parallel/ADB/serial dongles it was at least moderately hard, but with USB it's trivial.

      At the very least the USB dongle would have to do something sort of calculations to provide authentication using a cryptographic authentication system. Certainly
    • by grahamwest (30174) on Monday June 09 2008, @07:46PM (#23718117) Homepage
      The BBC micro had a number of variants of this, mostly to stop people converting the tape versions of game to run from floppy disc.

      For the most part they were trivial, but the best one used the 1MHz timer. The decryptor code was positioned immediately below the encrypted game code and ran in a (nested) loop. It XORed itself (including addresses it used for indirect loads and so on), the timer and to-be-decrypted data along with a few constants. When things magically came right the loop terminated and the very next thing in memory was the first instruction of the now-decrypted game code.

      Because the 6502 CPU only ran at 2MHz you had to figure out where in the (usually 2-6 cycles) fetch-execute cycle the, say, LDA instruction would read the hardware timer if you wanted to hand decode this. And of course the length of that instruction varied based on whether it was crossing a 256 byte page boundary or not (doing an indirect load) and so on. You couldn't move the target data because that would change the addresses being used for loads and stores and thus the progress of the decryption, you couldn't copy the code elsewhere and change it to update both copies because that would change the length of the loop and throw the timings off and you couldn't mess with the timer speed because it was fixed in hardware and, well, you get the idea.

      Clever fellow who came up with that one!