[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Sat 01/15/00 at 06:06 PM -0800):
> > arguments can be made for why you don't need to get that many texts
> > even given no knowledge of the watermark system. I'll post more if
> > pushed --PM]
>
> Please do, this sounds interesting.
ditto.
> > [Joe Sixpack has nothing to to lose and almost no odds of being caught
> > giving away two or three copies... --PM]
>
> The point of watermarking is that you can personalize each piece,
> linking it to the customer's identity. Percolation of warez through
> buddy networks would eventually reveal original purchaser.
if these meager functions are all that watermarking accomplishes,
it's a technology whose time isn't coming. serial numbers already
personalize each piece, with the result that serial numbers them-
selves have become a commodity in warez 'markets'--just like the
identical, mass-produced objects they serve to serialize.
have software industry orgs ever shown any interest in pursuing
original purchasers? why bother? it'd be a rare jury that'd punish
a schlemiel for having software 'stolen by his (kid|neighbor|house-
cleaner|cousin).' but for distributing warez, or making a profit
using them, well, that's another story--and that's who they *will*
go after.
> Of course this is unlikely to be implemented, but in theory it's doable.
the whole idea of serializing mass market commodities in order to
control their disposition beyond the point of sale is idiotic. in
very controlled, very limited settings it can make sense, but not
in an economy of scale.
cheers,
t
