Re: A89: U.S. Encryption Laws


[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: A89: U.S. Encryption Laws




I believe you mean "strong voice for OSS". :)

Bryan

----- Original Message -----
From: "Zoltan Kocsi" <zoltan@bendor.com.au>
To: <assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org>
Sent: Friday, December 03, 1999 9:57 PM
Subject: Re: A89: U.S. Encryption Laws


>
>  > So you have a strong voice for freeware?  I can't make out exactly what
you
>  > support.
>
> I think I have showed a string voice for OSS on this list several
> times. What do you mean by freeware ? Free as in free beer or as in
> free speech ? I'm less enthusiastic about the free beer side (i.e. you
> can download the binaries) but a strong supporter of the free speech
> side (you can download the source). This is quite off-topic, though.
>
> My point is that if TI built signature checking and HW protection
> into the calculator in order to allow them to make hefty profits
> on selling software, then they can shoot themselves on the foot.
> A cost sensitive target market with sufficient technical abilities
> can create a shadow industry of cracking the copy protection schemes.
> Therefore, TI can actually be worse off than with making smaller
> profit and leaving out the protection stuff.
>
> If TI's main customer group is highschool students, then IMHO
> it is exactly the cost sensitive, daring and able market that would be
> susceptible to such a reaction.
>
> Regards,
>
> Zoltan
>
>



Follow-Ups: References: