Looking back at what Bruce said (much earlier), it is apparent that he
is even more right than I had thought. The typical cost structure of
CD-ROM (true CD-ROM versus recordable CD) is apparently so small that
it has become one of the primary factors fueling the rise of VideoCD
popularity in China and other Far East nations (as is evidenced by the
rise of C-Cube Microsystems' VideoCD chip sets). The cost per CD
mechanically pressed (very low-tech) even by small-scale private
(Mom-n-Pop) manufacturers is on the order of $1.00US. It's a wonder
anyone in China would pay the full $79 for Windows 95.
Ern
Ernest Hua
<hua[_at_]chromatic.com>
- INCLUDED ARCHIVE FILE
>
> From: hua[_at_]chromatic.com (Ernest Hua)
> > From: bhayden[_at_]copatlaw.com (Bruce Hayden)
> > > From: hua[_at_]chromatic.com (Ernest Hua)
> > > The problem is that as copying gets easier and easier, computers
> > > will be used to implement more effective enforcement schemes. (It
> > > is painful to xerox a 100-page book, but it is a no-brainer to copy
> > > a 1 megabyte file.) My own guess is that more "metering" methods
> > > will be dreamed up so that each "book" is distributed with its own
> > > "reader" or use some de-facto "reader" (Web browsers are sort of on
> > > their way toward being universally accepted, but the encryption
> > > mechanisms are not there yet, and Adobe may push their Acrobat
> > > reader hard enough in time to get some circulation).
> >
> > Well, my feeling is that the programmers will always be a step or
> > two ahead of the metering people. And since it is software, the
> > copy protection override programs will become ubiquitous, as they
> > did before software vendors gave up on copyprotect software.
> >
> > And all that making ownership of such copybreaking software illegal
> > is going to do is to make everyone a criminal. And when everyone is
> > a criminal, respect for the law in general declines.
> >
> > We saw this with marijuana in the 1960s, the 55 mph speed limit in
> > the 1970s and 1980s, and copyright infringement by computer in the
> > 1990s.
>
> Actually, I was talking about browsing literature, using computer
> programs. Your average "serious" reader is not the same as your
> average "serious" hacker.
>
> I suspect the serious user of literature will still have a hard time
> reproducing entire databases, because it takes lots of storage to
> transmit/duplicate large databases, so publishers of such are safer
> from piracy. Also, the average person does not have access to CD-ROM
> writing technology, but they do have access to writable CD technology,
> therefore, it is much more difficult to copy because any attempt to
> detect for CD-ROM (as distinguished from the other, even related,
> media) will discover the transgression.
>
> The small documents publisher will have a hard time keeping their
> publications from being pirated simply because size and cost factors
> does not justify building in the more secure technology. They will
> have to use mass-produced protection methods, which means that once a
> hacker cracks the protection method, many published documents are
> instantly vulnerable.
>
> I think it is really easy for people like Bruce Lehman to succomb to
> the temptation of popularity with the vocal publishers by pushing for
> all sorts of impractical protection via legislative methods, but it is
> political suicide for anyone to take a stand against such excesses.
> So the "extremists" will win the policy battle. But can they actually
> gain the protection they truly want? Yes, sort of, because they can
> then sue. All they have to do is sue a few deep pocketted companies
Received on Fri Apr 26 1996 - 18:03:53 GMT