That would depend on the ability to prevent spoofing the presence of a licensed copy of the IDE. It's that old circular argument about copy protection again. At some point you have to give up because to make it really really inconvenient for the pirate, you also have to do the same for the end user. IMHO the real issue here is about how long the banner should pop.
Bob On Nov 15, 2010, at 3:31 PM, Alex Tweedly wrote: > On 15/11/2010 20:37, Andre Garzia wrote: >> (2) There is no way to distinguish your standalone running on your own >> machine from your standalone running somewhere else. Any way to detect that >> it is running on the same machine as the one used to develop the given >> standalone will not be tamper proof. You can't trust any metric given by a >> computer to identify itself. You can't trust MAC Addresses, HD Serial or CPU >> Serial, all those can be spoofed. >> > > That's right, you can't have a reliable check for the machine. But what you > can do, and I would argue you should do, is check for a valid IDE license. So > the rule could be: > > a standalone built with Personal Edition will check whether the machine has > a valid licensed copy of the IDE on it > If there is no IDE, then you get the 10 second start-up screen. > If there is a valid IDE, you get no start-up screen (or maybe a 1-second > start-up) > > That way, anyone with the Personal Edition can build and run on (all) their > own machines without being bothered. > > -- Alex. > _______________________________________________ > use-revolution mailing list > use-revolution@lists.runrev.com > Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription > preferences: > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
