Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 15:34:21 09/26/05
Go up one level in this thread
On September 26, 2005 at 18:21:00, enrico carrisco wrote: >On September 26, 2005 at 17:18:35, Roger D Davis wrote: > >>On September 26, 2005 at 16:33:53, Joachim Rang wrote: >> >>>Hi, >>> >>>I would like to explain a little bit how we have come to the decision to require >>>a hardware-based activation of Fruit: >>> >>>As the commercial idea became more concrete we realized with fear that we have >>>to bother about protection. Fabien is totally unaware of windows-functionality >>>and I am totally unaware of any real programming (beside html) so we didn't know >>>how to protect that thing. However with Fruit being the strongest engine we >>>expected some piracy-attraction. With an engine being only a few hundred KBs we >>>feared that a distribution by simply emailing the engine with a valid serial is >>>very easy and might hurt sales. This imagination together with the sale >>>expectation of well-informed sources led to this (perhaps desperate) attempt to >>>prevent pirating Fruit and to increase the sales of Fruit. Whether this is a >>>wise decision or not I don't know. As someone wrote below you are probably going >>>to loose customers in both cases. >>> >>>I don't like activation either and can understand that people will abstain from >>>buying Fruit because of this. I just can explain that it is not an attempt to >>>make maximum profit and get rich quickly but an attempt to increase the chances >>>that Fabien can hope in future to live on developing Fruit. Perhaps there are >>>some illusions about the profitability of selling a chess engine today. In the >>>90ies a new title could sell very well but today it isn't enough to make your >>>living out of that. >>> >>>There are some serious drawbacks of hardware activation but ideally you will >>>install it on your computer and don't be bothered anymore. Only if you buy >>>another computer you need to contact us. I know that there is uncertainty for >>>the user especially since we are not a well-established company but a business >>>which can disappear any time. I can only promise you that in case we dicontinue >>>distribution of Fruit there will be a free update with a non-hardware-based >>>lifetime key. I promise also that we will handle key requests generous without a >>>n arbitrary hardlimit and only reject if we have substantiated believe of key >>>trading. In the end it is your decision of trust in us which should determine >>>your decision. >>> >>>I hope you understand. >>> >>>kind regards >>> >>>Joachim >> >>I did considerable research on copy protection, and the Armadillo software >>system was the best going. It integrates with a number of software vendors to >>automatically generate hardware based keys, too, with very flexible rules about >>how much the system hardware can change before the Armadillo rejects the key. I >>think it the key can even be generated based on the serial number of the CPU. >> >>Shouldn't slow down the engine, and it's beyond the abilities of most crackers. >> >>Roger > >I don't know where you get the idea that it is beyond the ability of most >"crackers." Regardless of copy protection or information being seeked/verified >or even multiple/series of CRC checks for original code integrity, they normally >just knock out the verification routine in total -- not attempt to return any >kind of spoofed validation information. > >The real battle is hiding & protecting the copy protection itself. No matter how hard you work to preserve it, someone can break it if they work hard enough. The main goal should be to keep the honest people honest, and to prosecute those who blatantly steal it and try to distribute the stolen work.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.