Lol, much rather have NO dongle, but in light of the present climate in the wild, wild east, where the wink-and-nod law boils down to "If it's from the west, it's free to steal", I guess the days of freedom and concommitent _responsibility_ have to be curtailed.
I agree though, that soft locks suck. Unfortunately, they've been proven more effective at stopping the commerical hackers. Picture it this way. When China, for instance, or India, with populations of 1 billion+, copies say, a US engineering quota of a given piece of software, then pays their educated poor a few dollars a day and a bowl of rice to do the same work that you're doing, how long will you or your sister, brothers or children be working? Not very long I fear. I'd rather have draconian measures in place than to give it all away. >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 6:38 PM >To: [email protected] >Subject: Re: [PEDA] soft locks > >In a message dated 4/26/2007 3:25:50 PM Eastern Daylight Time, >[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > >> Sad to hear that it uses the new virtual dongling that has become the >> norm. > >Much rather have a hard dongle... I'm staying with 2004 .. >does what I need >and I use Solidworks for the 3D - they seem to have the >parametric stuff a bit >better than Autodesk had in the past. > >Here's a rant I sent to one of the "soft lock" companies; I >have to deal with >this with my recording studio too: > > >Thing is, I really want a dongle version - here's why: > >I hate soft locks 'cause if you go out of business, your >registration website >is down, or I upgrade hardware on a weekend, I'm screwed. > >Say four years from now I'm called to rework a previous design >I did using >your tool. > >Now, I haven't used that tool since we now (four years later) have >di-lithium, whiz-bang powered DSP/FPGA/ costs 0.10 USD MCU's. >So I've since upgraded >hardware, and moved on.... > >Well, Donald Trump wants millions of these old designs built >but needs a >hard-coded pre-nuptial that prints on the LCD. So I try to >reload the old program. > >It's Sunday on Christmas holiday. And there's a major riot of trophy >wives-to-be that knocked out all the Internet connectivity >'cause they're pissed that >Donald is selling these things. > >I find the old installer, run it and ---- > >--- lo-and-behold it's useless. > >Then lets say you guys go bye bye 'cause you hit the jackpot, >they don't make >the stuff anymore 'cause the aforementioned di-lithium W-B >chips are now in >vogue, and you now backpack across Europe eating just whole >wheat toast and >coffee. You married a Sports Illustrated model and don't want bothered. > >So now I got files written for your specific tool and all my >work is now lost >forever... Donald's mad....my house gets over run with angry >trophy wives... >Tom Cruise is jumping up and down on my couch like a crazed >orangutan.... not >a pretty scene. And it's Christmas... > >So I like USB dongles ... > > >In fact, having no way to re-enable the software without >intervention from a >manufacturer that goes belly up is a violation of the Fair Use/Quiet >Enjoyment: > >"Quiet Enjoyment" >Licensees, having paid for the right to use licensed >technology, generally >seek to ensure that nothing interferes with the benefits they >have received. For >example, licensees are concerned with their ability to obtain >assistance from >the licensor in fixing defects that are discovered in the >technology, to have >the right to fix the defects themselves if the licensor is >unable to do so, >to obtain periodic upgrades and other maintenance services >from the licensor, >to transfer their rights if they sell their business and to >continue enjoying >the technology even if the licensor becomes bankrupt." > > >Most people inaccurately associate ownership to the technology >as "... >that's the reason they license software..." but that ain't so... > >You see, one of the first "licenced" forms of technology was >by none other >than Ray Dolby. The reason they license it is to forgo >"selling" ( and the >inherent issues of capitalization/export/tax issues) so that >all sales are >considered licensed works which are considered as royalty >income - therefore taxed as >income. > >See this: > >http://www.fenwick.com/docstore/Publications/IP/Patent_Licensing.pdf > > >So a dongle version would be nice.... > > > >************************************** > See what's free at http://www.aol.com. > >____________________________________________________________ >You are subscribed to the PEDA discussion forum > >To Post messages: >mailto:[email protected] > >Unsubscribe and Other Options: >http://techservinc.com/mailman/listinfo/peda_techservinc.com > >Browse or Search Old Archives (2001-2004): >http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Browse or Search Current Archives (2004-Current): >http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] > > This e-mail transmission and its attachments may contain information from Avtron Manufacturing, Inc. that is proprietary, privileged and/or confidential and is intended exclusively for the person(s) to whom it is addressed. Any use, copying, retention or disclosure by any person other than the intended recipient or the intended recipient's designees is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and delete all copies. ____________________________________________________________ You are subscribed to the PEDA discussion forum To Post messages: mailto:[email protected] Unsubscribe and Other Options: http://techservinc.com/mailman/listinfo/peda_techservinc.com Browse or Search Old Archives (2001-2004): http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] Browse or Search Current Archives (2004-Current): http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
