I understand where the vendors are coming from, but that does not mean that I'm willing to assume a risk for their convenience. Given two products of comparable cost and functionality, I'll always opt for the one without keys, except in the unlikely case of a vendor willing to contractually guaranty indemnification when the key software interferes with legitimate use. Tony seems to be unable to see things from the customer's perspective.
I will confess that in my callow youth I did write code to protect my intellectual property. The first time that it caused problems for an authorized user in an unexpected environment, I saw the error of my ways and didn't do it again. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> on behalf of Schuffenhauer, Mark <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2018 6:40 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Product license key program My thought is simply, license keys make it easier (but not always 100%) to protect the intellectual property that belongs to the owner. It in most cases prevents the expense of having to resort to investigation and litigation of something. I think its great Tony takes the time to properly account in his example. Some people are careless, some are less rigorous, and some people are criminal. License keys and other items that reduce simplicity in product installation and maintenance are a bit to avoid the first two items, and aimed squarely at the criminals. >From a non-legal standpoint, but from an impacted person standpoint, I >understand where owners of all intellectual/copyrighted property are coming >from. At times it's a pain below my back, but I get it. -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Seymour J Metz Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2018 3:24 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Product license key program No. The relevant difference between copying the sheet music and singing it has nothing to do with the equipment used, but with what that equipment is used to do. Making copies not covered by fair use or license is a violation regardless of the hardware used. The Devil is in the details. Let's take your copier claim. A copier contains a scanner and a printer. Scanning a song is in a very different category from printing the canned song. If I am licensed to play the song and have software that will play it from the scanned image, that performance is legal. As to recording the service, that again is not a question of what equipment you use but of what you use it for. The legal issues are the same whether you make a wire recording, a tape recording or a digital recording. Maybe you should go back to law school and take a refresher course. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> on behalf of Tony Thigpen <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2018 2:22 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Product license key program Seymour, You knowledge of music copyright is incorrect. In many cases it *does* matter what equipment. I am involved with the copyright issues with songs at our church. I have to account separately for: 1) A pre-printed copy of the song, such as a hymnal 2) A 'copy' of the song printed locally on a printer or copier 2) The display of the song on a projector during the service And, if I record the worship services, I have to account for: 1) Did the audio recording of our people singing the song get recorded> 2) Did the video of the service actually capture display of the song by the projector on the screen? And, as for the recordings, 1) If I play back the audio or video to a assembly, then that is another item to be accounted for. 2) If I make a DVD and send it to someone outside our congergation, then it has to be accounted for. Tony Thigpen Seymour J Metz wrote on 02/26/2018 12:48 PM: > It's fair when the vendor assumes the risk. It's not fair when the customer > has bee left holding the bag. "product keys are just any other license > enforcement" is not even close. If I license, e.g., a copyrighted song for > use in a movie, it doesn't matter what equipment I use to play the song or to > record it in the movie. The enforcement is via legal proceedings that the > vendor does not invoke capriciously, but only when he has good reason to > believe that I am in violation of the license terms. > > Software keys, OTOH, can and have caused problems for legitimate users. Some > are more reliable than others, but I see nothing wrong with a shop refusing > to use a product because they are not willing to assume the risk. If you are > really confident that there is no risk, add an indemnification clause to your > contract and I'll take your confidence seriously. If you don't trust it > enough to have such a clause, why should a potential customer trust it? > > > -- > Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz > http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 > > ________________________________________ > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> on > behalf of ITschak Mugzach <[email protected]> > Sent: Monday, February 26, 2018 12:37 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Product license key program > > Shmuel, > > Vendors are busy in developing products, not in tracing/tracking their > clients. product keys are just any other license enforcement (eg. > electricity, water and any product that you pay per use. Capacity is > just another way to limit q measure usage. Sound fair to me. > > ITschak > > On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 7:11 PM, Seymour J Metz <[email protected]> wrote: > >> And vendors using keys sometimes victimize honest customers. BTDT,GTS. >> >> For all of you vendors: it is a fact of life that most vendors have >> competitors and that some shops will give their money to the vendor >> that does not treat them like criminals. Of course, if you are >> willing to sign a contract with big penalty clauses for a >> malfunctioning key checking routine or key delivery system, that will >> help to reduce the competitive edge, but I won't hold my breathe. >> >> >> -- >> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz >> http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 >> >> ________________________________________ >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> on >> behalf of Charles Mills <[email protected]> >> Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2018 12:47 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: Product license key program >> >> As the author of such software, let me confirm what others have said: >> each vendor does things its own way -- or perhaps not at all. CA has >> a central "server" program for administering licenses; the software I >> am responsible for has the licensing embedded in the program itself. >> >> The exact technology is proprietary and a trade secret. To say "we do >> X and Y and Z" would be to facilitate its defeat by a dishonest customer. >> >> [And please, let's not start the whole "to key or not to key" >> discussion again. Vendor keys are a fact of life. Yes, they can be a >> PITA. Most customers are honest -- beyond honest to the point of >> paranoia -- but a few are not. And honest customers sometimes make >> honest mistakes.] >> >> Charles >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] >> On Behalf Of Peter >> Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2018 3:55 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: Product license key program >> >> Generally which assembler macro or program sets the expiration ? >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> - For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, >> send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO >> IBM-MAIN >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> - For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, >> send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO >> IBM-MAIN >> > > > > -- > ITschak Mugzach > *|** IronSphere Platform* *|* *Information Security Contiguous > Monitoring for Legacy **| * > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send > email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send > email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ----------------------------Disclaimer---------------------------- This email may contain privileged and/or confidential information that is intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you are strictly prohibited from disclosing, copying, distributing or using any of the information contained in the transmission. If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender (“Company”) immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, including all electronic and hard copies. This communication may contain nonpublic personal information about consumers which is subject to restrictions under the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act and the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. You may not directly or indirectly reuse or disclose such nonpublic personal information for any purpose other than to provide the services for which you are receiving the information. There are risks associated with the use of electronic transmission. The sender of this information does not control the method of transmittal or any service providers and the sender assumes no duty, liability, or obligation for the security, receipt, or any third party interception of this transmission. The Company reserves the right to amend statements made herein in the event of a mistake. Unless expressly stated herein to the contrary, only agreements in writing signed by an authorized officer of the Company may be enforced against it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
