Referring to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copy_protection the Wikipedia page about Copy protection , wouldn't there be a potential conflict of interest between "Internet product activation" and the risk to Bible software users in persecuted countries, if such a method were ever to be adopted?
-- David Peter von Kaehne wrote: > > Most of these rigorous steps are rapidly overcome if enough impetus is > there. > > At this moment in time our encrypted modules are better protected > than e.g. DVDs with their dvdcss encryption. > > I think most publishers as such are happy with a token protection which > somehow states "You should not really do this!". Look at e-sword with > its perfunctory protection until recently. And the current form is > probably not much better > > If it prevents the decent people from messing too much (beyond e.g. > private export into other better liked programmes) then this is probably > good enough. > > The problems with us are probably more about perception of being > irrelevant, not worth the effort - and that can so easily become a > self-perpetuating matter. > > Peter > > _______________________________________________ > sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org > http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel > Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Printing-an-encrypted-module--tp25167239p25187488.html Sent from the SWORD Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
