drafter69 opened this issue on Sep 04, 2002 ยท 44 posts
Mason posted Wed, 04 September 2002 at 12:35 PM
Protection is not going to prevent cracks. It prevents casual theft, a big difference. You lock your car don't you? But anyone with a brick and a crowbar can break into your car and steal it so why do you bother locking it? Why not just leave it unlocked with the keys in the ignition? You lock it because that cuts down a huge portion of opportunity or casual theft. Its one thing to have someone smash your window. Its another if they can just get into your car with the keys in the ignition and drive off. How many times have we heard about the moron who pulls up to 7-11 and leaves his BMW running to go in and buy something and someone just hops in the car and drives off. Heck, even insurance won't pay on that. CL isn't going to stop cracks. They are trying to stop casual copying. Also, legally, if they do not make an effort to activily protect their product they lose their right to pursue theives. They must show they are making an active effort to protect their property. Also, they do have a right to make $$$ and stay in business and protect that business investment. Quite frankly, from what I read, the registration is no different than registering Max. You go online, get the unlock code and you're set to go. I think this is a big stink over nothing. Also I think if they did not make an effort to protect their property I as a paying customer would be insulted. Why should I pay when others get the product for free cause it has 0 copy protection. CL is supposed to be a socialist charity? Copy protection is also a way to respect your paying customers by making their purchase valuable. They paid so they get to use the product. People who don't pay shouldn't benifit.