Copy Protection

[Shannon]

I am thinking about implementing copy protection in my programs, but not in the sense of standard DRM. I'm talking about additions to the script, which would cause the program to fail to function if you knowingly make or use or distribute the program illegally. It could include exceptions for fair use and encourage abusers to pay for what they are using illegally. It could also have some scripting specifically designed to get people to refuse to make, use or distribute illegal copies of the program.

What do you guys think?

[Subeternal]

I think the first idea would work the best considering anyone could obtain it but it wouldnt work for those with that particular mindset as your saying. Reminds me of Blade's sword with the hand recognition. The other stuff sounds good too but I'm just concerned with how long it will have to be script wise especially in the truly long scripts like some of the business ones.

Looking forward to seeing this develop =)

[Shannon]

(09-18-2011 06:47 PM)Subeternal Wrote:  I think the first idea would work the best considering anyone could obtain it but it wouldnt work for those with that particular mindset as your saying. Reminds me of Blade's sword with the hand recognition. The other stuff sounds good too but I'm just concerned with how long it will have to be script wise especially in the truly long scripts like some of the business ones.

Looking forward to seeing this develop =)

I have a prototype script written that is very short compared to most of my scripts, and I kept it as short and to the point as possible specifically because of that.

[Roy]

Will this addition reduce the efficiency of the subliminals?

[Shannon]

(09-19-2011 07:35 PM)Roy Wrote:  Will this addition reduce the efficiency of the subliminals?

Its designed to be completely transparent unless you're making, using or distributing illegal copies. It will have no effect on efficiency if you're using a legal copy in a legal way.

[LionMonkey]

I think it's a bit over the top. I mean, people probably share some of their subliminals to their closest friend(s) and if they have a belief that they know it's illegal but they don't really care because everyone does it, just as with movies and music now a days.

But on the other side. I think it's great, but I also think that the subliminal will be less effective to more people. Making it very precise and not too overall will do it in my opinion.

[Shannon]

It's over the top to want to unobtrusively stop people from stealing from me just because "everybody does it"?

I also just got done saying that it won't make the program any less effective unless it's being used, distributed or copied illegally. Where do you get that it will be less effective? Precision is what subliminal scripting is all about.

[ALI6NMENT]

What about subs that are custom made/name embeded? In this case would you not include them?

[Shannon]

Name embedded subs will only work for the person named, so they already have a form of copy protection. It wouldn't be necessary.

[LionMonkey]

(09-20-2011 10:54 PM)Shannon Wrote:  It's over the top to want to unobtrusively stop people from stealing from me just because "everybody does it"?

I also just got done saying that it won't make the program any less effective unless it's being used, distributed or copied illegally. Where do you get that it will be less effective? Precision is what subliminal scripting is all about.

It was just something I thought of because I did offer my brother to try the subliminal I've done but he didn't want to.
I don't know how people's subconscious are but there was a little doubt somewhere in me when I read the idea of what could be implemented in the subs. I don't know why I thought it except for offering my brother the sub.

hey.. man.. you are the specialist! and you seem pretty sure about the decision ;-p

[Shannon]

I'm just trying to feel this out so I don't do anything without having thought it through and gotten feedback. I'm interested in balancing things to benefit me and my customers. I don't like how the big corporations do copy protection.

[taylord1984]

maybe you could just make a load of fakes that make people come buy them. then release them on torrents

I cant see how any body would trust downloading them from other sources as people could of edited them to do all sorts of damage to the user using them them.

[DrDestiny]

Hello Shannon According to my understanding of the law of karma , if someone was using a download that they had obtained illegally then karmically they wouldn't receive any real benefit from it. Besides which as you know people don't value something obtained without any cost and in such a situation the person would likely discard the product ( ie stop using it ) before they had obtained any benefit .
Also i think that if someone is really interested in self-change through using subliminals then they would happily pay the $15 . The people obtaining a sub illegally would likely never have bought it anyway, therefore i feel that you are not going to lose out financially to the extent you think.

Another possibility : If someone shares a sub with someone and that person benefits , then isn't it quite likely that they are then more likely to come back and purchase more subs legally from you ? I think that is a possibility . Isn't the whole web built on that ie giving away free content to encourage people to come back and purchase?
Anyway these are my thoughts . Hope they help .
One more thing .If a person breaks the law , the karma is on their head ,whereas if a person benefits from a sub ( even one obtained illegally) , that positive karma comes back to you.
Thanks for all your hard work Shannon!

[Shannon]

(09-27-2011 07:46 AM)DrDestiny Wrote:  Hello Shannon According to my understanding of the law of karma , if someone was using a download that they had obtained illegally then karmically they wouldn't receive any real benefit from it. Besides which as you know people don't value something obtained without any cost and in such a situation the person would likely discard the product ( ie stop using it ) before they had obtained any benefit .
Also i think that if someone is really interested in self-change through using subliminals then they would happily pay the $15 . The people obtaining a sub illegally would likely never have bought it anyway, therefore i feel that you are not going to lose out financially to the extent you think.

Another possibility : If someone shares a sub with someone and that person benefits , then isn't it quite likely that they are then more likely to come back and purchase more subs legally from you ? I think that is a possibility . Isn't the whole web built on that ie giving away free content to encourage people to come back and purchase?
Anyway these are my thoughts . Hope they help .
One more thing .If a person breaks the law , the karma is on their head ,whereas if a person benefits from a sub ( even one obtained illegally) , that positive karma comes back to you.
Thanks for all your hard work Shannon!

If I download a movie illegally and watch it, I have benefited from my action. Karma may cost me at some point in the future, but I still benefited. Karma rarely works instantly.

My understanding of karma is that it is a debit and credit system in which credit can only be earned to balance past debts, and the balancing may or my not happen within this lifetime.

I am planning to use the copy protection in such a way that it will prevent people who are breaking the law from benefiting from the program at all -- thus giving them no incentive to copy, share, etc. But say you got a copy for free, and you want it to work. You could always buy a copy and then it would work just fine. But it will only work if you do not share, illegally copy, distribute, etc. the program.

Casually giving a copy to a friend, for example, is still copyright infringement, no matter how casual and harmless it may seem, so that would mean that the program would stop working for you and your friend would never get any benefit from it unless a copy was purchased by them.

We have free programs available for people to try before they buy. In some cases, a copy that was obtained illegally would lead to a new customer, and in some cases it would not. The copyright protection routines would therefore also make the person consciously aware that they are breaking the law by making, using, sharing or otherwise distributing the program in ways that violates copyright law, and it would encourage (but not force) them to do the right thing and get a legal copy. It would also make them aware consciously that only a legal copy will function for them.

I have not yet decided how to go about implementing this fully, but it seems like a win-win to me.

[Roy]

Quote:Casually giving a copy to a friend, for example, is still copyright infringement, no matter how casual and harmless it may seem, so that would mean that the program would stop working for you and your friend would never get any benefit from it unless a copy was purchased by them.

If I give a copy to my brother but not using the program at the moment isn't
it like borrowing a CD to someone or does it still count as copyright infrigement?

[Shannon]

(10-10-2011 11:33 AM)Roy Wrote:  

Quote:Casually giving a copy to a friend, for example, is still copyright infringement, no matter how casual and harmless it may seem, so that would mean that the program would stop working for you and your friend would never get any benefit from it unless a copy was purchased by them.

If I give a copy to my brother but not using the program at the moment isn't
it like borrowing a CD to someone or does it still count as copyright infrigement?

Copyright ingringement in that case depends on the source of the original medium. If you have a CD as the original, there is only that copy in existence. The moment you make a new copy to give to someone else, whether it is in use by you or not, there are two copies now, and only one has been paid for. The only acceptable reason to create additional copies is fair use, which I define as follows:

Creating one or more copies (say ten or less, for arguments sake) that do not leave your personal sphere of usage or control, for the purpose of archiving/backup, or use across multiple devices, BY YOU.

Think of it this way: If I buy a computer, and then somehow manage to create an exact copy of that computer, and I give it to my brother, does the manufacturer get paid for that copy? Do the engineers who designed it get paid? How about the guys who fabricated the parts design, or the parts? Or the guys who put it together? Or the deliverers, or the suppliers, or the people who made the whole thing come together to happen?

When I create something, I am spending time, effort, energy, money (yes, money!) and other resources I cannot always get back to do so. I am creating something that nobody else can create, because nobody else knows how I do exactly what I do. What I create has value, or you would not see it being purchased.

The fair exchange is such that each person who wants to use that product must ether pay what is being asked for it, or be given it as a gift of some sort. I could give you a gift certificate for a copy of something, and then you would be getting it legally. But if that copy you got as a gift becomes a copy for you and a copy for your brother, you are breaking copyright law, and the rules of the agreement inherent in this whole deal. For me to have incentive to continue creating these programs, doing this constant research and development, and the money to run this operation - as well as pay my bills - I need that those who benefit from my work, return the favor by paying for it what is asked.

Otherwise, I work and someone else benefits. What is it called when person A does the work, and person B benefits, without giving anything back to person A for that benefit? Depending on how you look at it, and the specific circumstances, it's usually slavery, usury or theft. None of these is very good, or fair.

So... if I make the program refuse to function until and unless I have received the requested benefit in return, the balance of exchange is restored. You get what you paid for, and I get paid for what work I do. Fair is fair.

[ncbeareatingman]

Since this IS the script room. MY feedback on the scripts is that If I never saw one I'd be just fine with it all. I prefer NOT to know whats on the script,while some people,do and I respect that too.
howver personally I never need to see a script. Im just fine without it. some arent,but I am.NcBear