Hi, everyone, Yesterday I promised the list that I would find out why Kurzweil 1000 is no longer under the requirement of an authorization disk or key (Flextalk version). Following my note you will find the correspondence that transpired between David Bradburn and me concerning this subject. I ask you and HJ as well to read it with care. It speaks for itself. In no way is this reflective of criticism onmy part. I present it as informational. Evelyn Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1999 16:59:52 -0500 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Evelyn Weckerly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: authorization disks Hello Evelyn: I am replying to your questions concerning the issue of copy protection. Kurzweil 1000 FlexTalk and DECtalk editions became separate products last summer with the introduction of version 3.5. Making them separate products allowed us to remove copy protection from the FlexTalk version. This is still the case today. I do not feel qualified to comment upon HJ's decision to copy protect their software, other than to mention that they are not alone in doing so. As to the fact that JFW Eloquence only works with JFW, you should consider the fact that the maker of Eloquence might be insisting on this as a condition of sale. Regards, David Bradburn Evelyn Weckerly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 03/22/99 12:40:19 PM To: David Bradburn/KESI/US/LHS@LHS cc: Subject: authorization disks Hello, David, There has recently been a great deal of discussion of authorization disks and keys on the JFW list. It occurred to me to ask you the following: Why did Kurzweil decide to abndon the requirement for authorization disks and keys for the Flextalk version of Kurzweil 1000, but not for the DecTalk version? Is some other kind of copy protection being used for the Flextalk version? Please know that I intend to post your reply to the JFW list as part of the continuing discussion there. It's my feeling that if Kurzweil, which costs even more than JFW for Windows 95/98, could decide that it no longer needed to require a floppy disk copy protection system, why not HJ? It's interesting to note further that your Flextalk version allows us to use Flextalk with JFW, but the version of Eloquence shipped with JFW cannot be used with anything else. This is not an attempt to pit one vendor against another. My request is sincerely intended for information only. I have both pooducts and no competing software in respect to either company. Sincerely, ENDEvelyn Weckerly Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 07:37:52 -0500 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Evelyn Weckerly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: authorization disks Hi again Evelyn: We were required to copy protect Kurzweil 1000 because one of the technology vendors we license software from insisted upon it. The issue of copy protection with DECtalk and Elan Proverbe speech is still required and selling them as seperate versions was the only way we could relieve the stress and frustration of copy protection for FlexTalk speech users. No one at Kurzweil likes copy protection and we were as relieved as our user base when we were able to change this policy. Of course DECtalk and Elan speech users still have to contend with it but that is their choice. One of the advantages of Version 4.0 is that L&H speech is included and features 6 languages. This helps out no end with people wanting European languages since L&H does not require their technology be copy protected. Let me know if you need further clarification. Regards, David Evelyn Weckerly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 03/22/99 11:31:18 PM To: David Bradburn/KESI/US/LHS@LHS cc: Subject: Re: authorization disks Hi, David, I know you're not in a position to comment about HJ, and I did not ask for that. I just wanted to know how your company was handling this issue. I gathered that the two were separate products, but I still don't really understand how you could remove the copy protection requirement. Software development is expensive, and the people who do it and support it as well as market it are worthy of just compensation. So I wanted to know how Kurzweil was now handling this. Frankly, I am glad to be rid of the need of a disk and keys. It was a qroblem for me that I'm glad not to have to deal with any more. Sincerely, Evelyn Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 13:11:55 -0500 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Evelyn Weckerly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: authorization disks Hi Evelyn: We are of course concerned that some people are making illegal copies of Kurzweil 1000. Notice my choice of words "are making" because we are certain it happens. However, we also know that this is a relatively small percentage of the total number of users out there and choose not to worry ourselves needlessly about it. Besides the legal consequences of doing such a thing, those users who choose to use pirated software will not in most cases have access to documentation in Braille or on cassette. They are also unlikely to contact customer support for help either for fear of being found out. Regards, David Evelyn Weckerly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 03/23/99 11:17:17 AM To: David Bradburn/KESI/US/LHS@LHS cc: Subject: Re: authorization disks Hi, David, I think I want to discuss one more point: I'm very much interested in the philosophical and moral question here. Given the price of Kurzweil 1000 and human nature being what it is, your company has taken a considerable risk of theft of the software by those who do not really want to pay for it. May I conclude that you do not see this decision as a great risk for the company? I, for one, welcomed the change. But cd roms have made piracy even easier than before. What is your company's attitude about this? Any software developer has a legitimate concern here? Sincerely, Evelyn - Visit the jfw ml web page: http://jfw.cjb.net
