Well, I, too, think that you are not seeing my perspective in the correct light and, maybe, the discussion should be dropped because the more I look at it, there is no "mutually beneficial" solution that everyone would agree upon.

AFAIC, your opinions are yours, mine are mine, and whether they meet anywhere is immaterial and inconsequential in the grand scheme of things.

I harbor no ill-will toward you or any other software developer. Whereas I am not a software developer, I guess I do not think along the same lines. As a consumer, I tend to think logically:

What is the problem? Warez and illegal copying of the software.

What can be done about it? A) Nothing, B) Protection, C) Waiting for a Viable Option.

What are the costs/benefits of the actions above?

A) Nothing:

• Costs:

• Company: Product still gets warezed, copied, shared, whatever; loses out on money (supposing the warezers would have actually paid for it in the first place).
• Customer: Customers will have to pay higher prices to cover the costs of losses as with any B&M business.
• Warez: Unhindered.

• Benefits:

• Company: Developers can stay focused on the software; do not have to deal with the "protection overhead"; less customer/technical support costs.
• Customer: Customers get to use the software as intended without any additional "administrivia" to it.
• Warez: Unhindered.

B) Protection:

• Costs:

• Company: More administration; support costs; and the cost of the protection and implementation.
• Customer: Aggravation and frustration with the additional steps to use the software; longer hold times for support; less system/software stability.
• Warez: Unhindered.

• Benefits:

• Company: A supposed increase in sales and a corresponding decrease in illegal copies.
• Customer: May, eventually pay less to cover for theft (although many companies never reduce the price regardless).
• Warez: Unhindered.

C) Waiting for a Viable Option.

• Costs:

• Company: Product still gets warezed, copied, shared, whatever while awaiting the viable option; loses out on money.
• Customer: Customers will have to pay higher prices to cover the costs of losses as with any B&M business.
• Warez: Unhindered.

• Benefits:

• Company: Retains the status quo without incurring additional costs or alienating their legit customers; once the viable option presents itself, implementation will actually reduce the warezed, copied, shared, versions of the software.
• Customer: Retains the same rights and privileges; once the viable option is implemented, they can rest assured that their money was spent wisely knowing that illegal users who have not paid for the software cannot use it.
• Warez: Loses the ability to warez, copy, share the software closing the "black market" upon which they have created.

I realize that this is way over-simplified, but there is no sense in getting into the "nitty-gritty" since we do not see eye-to-eye, nor will the discussion continue. However, hopefully, this will give you insight as to where my confusion lies. Perhaps there is some sort of "inside information" that makes this all worthwhile that the consumers do not see. But, the consumers cannot educate themselves without the companies being honest and straight-forward as to the justifications of imposing an "across the board" solution to a problem that, seemingly in comparison, is the vast minority of the cases.

I do appreciate your involvement, your attempt to shed some light on the subject, and for sticking your hand into a veritable hornets nest. That is much more than many other companies have been willing to do. But, unitl I become a software developer or develop some sort of clairvoyance, I guess I will never be able to see the other side's POV.