CL says to shut down ALL programs, anti-virus, BG programs etc, but if I'm going on line to get web authorization code I have to have AOL running. Is it safe to assume that is OK?

Yep. :)

web authorization code??? whats that?? for what reason??? Did i miss something??

When you install Poser 5, you put in a challenge code, and CL gives you a response code, you need both to get poser to work. You have to contact CL by WEB, PHONE, etc to get the response code. (see install/register in the manual) Somebody said it was simular to MS XP Windows registeration. They also mention this was tried in Propack, but they got a lot of complaints, and discontuied it.

It is currently in the e-version of ProPack and Avatar Lab.

this is plain silly. i hope you won't include this one in p5.

What is a e-version?( sorry german, dont understand all) and is there really such a thing in p5?

E-version is the download only version of ProPack and it is only available for US customers and only for ProPack. We will not have downloadable or e-version Poser 5 due to its extremely large size. Aleks, as you can see by the Poser 5 manual and the questions about, the same has been included in this release as well.

Reminds me of the updating from bryce 4 to bryce 5 and many of the old serialnumbers did not work .And those people had to call by phone for a fix. Seems to get real funny!! See me sitting here with the poser update in the hands and nothing is working ( always the lucky one ,whos serial numbers are not working and so on)

i figured out that one, thanks. it was a rhetorical question trying to show how i dislike being forced to register. it won't stop warezers to crack it and spread it, it is plain harassement of your loyal customers. supposed i don't have an internet connection, do i have to make a call to us, when i don't speak english good enough (or to germany, it's the same). are you going to pay for the phone bill?

This is precisely the reason I have now decided not to upgrade.

---

Jeff

Renderosity Senior Moderator

Hablo español

Ich spreche Deutsch

Je parle français

Mi parolas Esperanton. Ĉu vi?

Hope users have some days before you have to register( same as win xp where there are 30 days til xp stops working) As said before im always the lucky one who has probs with the serialnumbers, breaking phonelines,not readable cds .....

really, imagine this situation: i have to install xp on the new pc, i have to type in the code, send it to microsoft, get hold of new one, type that in too, install max, type in 3 (!) different lenghty numbers, send for a authorization code, install it, install final render, type in some codes, send for an authorization code, install poser5, type in some serial numbers, send for an authorization code... i have typically 10-15 different software that i use every day for my work - double that for mac - how long do you people expect me to make one pc operational? a week? and i have four pcs and three macs in my office. what comes next? authorization code for every 3rd party figure? authorization before each rendering? please, reconsider your new authorization policy!

As someone who upgrades his machine fairly often, I too ask CL to rethink its copy protection/authorization policy. thanks, --lordbyron

Yeah Max's is just silly now.

I agree with Aleks. These protection schemes are very simple, like the manufacturers describe them, until you pile them up on top of one another. If Poser were the only app I had to go through this process for I wouldn't mind. But the manufacturers (as CL has) keep telling us this is the wave of the future and we should expect all products to have similar protection. I run dozens of software packages and that simple little process adds up to a hell of a lot of time when doing a clean install... which a lot of us do quite often. Phoenix

So will CL actually finger print my PC and if I reinstall it after PC upugrades not know it is the same computer? Or is it simply to get people to register and seeing that more than one person doesn't try to install the same copy on multiple machines and under different names.

I hope that whatever copy protection they use, it would be portable like Max 4 since I use Poser on a number of machines - laptop, home computer and at work.

The thing with all of these type of 'security' is that the legit users (the majority of this forum, myself included) are the ones that have to put up with all these security codes. Where as the pirates just get hacked versions by-passing the security. It is kind of annoying having 7 dongles sticking out the back of your pc as one picture I have seen for example. Serial number, dongles, codes are in the end a complete waste of time as the only people who actually use them are the legit users. I have so many serial numbers, dongles, auth codes to do when i do a clean install and it takes an ages, where as a pirate will bott up his system and have all of 'his' programs on 1 dvd with codes etc and he is up and running quicker than the legit users. Nothing much can be done about it and yes it sucks as the legit users pay for the cost of the pirates in the end.

"Locks are for honest people" ;-)

I'm an honest person, so I have no problem with it.<< I'm an honest person, but i do have a big problem with it. CL is in effect pissing in the faces of their customers and saying "who cares what you think, as long as we get your money" >>If Curious Labs is making it a hassle for them, too bad.<< They're not. They're only making a hassle for the paying customers. Within a couple days of its release, some hacker will come up with a crack to counter CL's "protection" device and he will distribute it to all the warez sites and Kazaa, so all the pirates will have an easy time installing and using their Kazaa edition of P5, but the legit users, who have no need of a crack, will be saddled with the burden of having to check in with CL every time they need to reinstall it... So, as far as I'm concerned, I'll just stick with P4.

---

Jeff

Renderosity Senior Moderator

Hablo español

Ich spreche Deutsch

Je parle français

Mi parolas Esperanton. Ĉu vi?

As I asked in a different thread..if we HONEST users go through all this to get our new P5 activated, can we note the activation code and use it again if we need to reinstall OR do we have to call Curious Labs again?? (and I would have to call.. I don't put software of any import on my "internet machine")... If I have to call for every install I am seriously considering if I "need" P5 at all... And I do not know if my other question was EVER answered.. CL.. for us folks who have no time to BUILD a character in the face room with your thousands of dials, will you allow 3rd party talents to create pre-set mapped characters of your new mesh man and woman and offer those library characters for sale? Lyne

Life Requires Assembly and we all know how THAT goes!

Lyne, Answer is... it depends. :) No simple answer. It is NOT correct to say that once you have an activation code it will work for life. If you install a new hard drive, a new operating system, a new modem or video card, get a new computer... various changes such as these will cause you to need a new activation code. CL has not made clear (and perhaps they can not) exactly which changes would require a new code. If you simply crash your computer and reinstall with all the same hardware and software, you will probably ot need a new activation code. Probably. Phoenix

Well in the other thread, Jackson said: __________________________ 12. Re: Poser 5...Victoria, Stephanie, Voluptuous Vicki, and Steffy Stax by Jackson on 8/29/02 20:05 The way I read it you have to go thru the process every time you install it because it generates a unique "challenge code" each time. Your original authorization code won't work with the new challenge code generated during the new install. ____________________ If this or your thoughts on it, phoenix, are right, then I am going to have a lot of $$ to spend on P-FOUR models I am thinking! I am honest, but I refuse to be held hostage by some software like this! :( If I am in the middle of a project, and it's a holiday or weekend and I need my software working?!! oh well.. P4 is really fine and I have hundreds of $$ tied up in it, and it's models, maps, etc.... really don't NEED another version to support! Lyne

Life Requires Assembly and we all know how THAT goes!

Well, I've decided not to buy the upgrade, either. Not only is it insulting to paying customers, and a huge inconvenience, but it's the principle of it all. I'm not all that impressed by the new "Judy" and "Don" characters, anyway. I'll continue to use only the Millennium characters, no matter whether I upgrade or not. I'll just continue using P4. It does what I wnat it to, adn that's all that makes me happy. And several of you in posts above are right, it's not going to stop the dishonest pirates from getting a hold of it and distributing it anyway. If CL thinks it will protect them from theft, they seriously need to have their IQ checked. Melanie Feeling in a menopausal mood at the moment

You guys are too funny. Not one of you has seen it and you assume it's gonna be a huge inconvenience. :shakes head: If you have a web connection it take less than a minute to unlock your app.

"If you have a web connection it take less than a minute to unlock your app." This is very presumptuous in and of itself. Presuming that the challange/response generator is not something that needs human intervention (ie, a script, program, etc) there are a myriad of things that can prevent legitimate users from obtaining the required response code from a myriad of technical aspects at any given point in time. Just the apparent onslaught of preorder P5 purchases alone may be enough to overwhelm the registration process. Of course, all of this is just pure conjecture on our part, but CL seems to be quite "vague" if almost non-responsive regarding the many requests to describe the process so people can determine if the upgrade would be worth the additional security verification. I, for one, would like to read an "authoritative" discussion on the topic from those in the know in order to sway my decision one way or the other. So, how about it CL? Are you prepared to make an official disclosure or potentially lose more money in legitimate sales than you probably would have due to piracy?

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/messages.ez?ForumID=12356&Form.ShowMessage=846354&Reply=847413#24

I assure you, there is no conjecture on my part. I've made a post about it at the link above.

Gee, I made this same argument (against piracy protection schemes) on Renderosity more than a year ago, forgot which forum or discussion. Everyone seemed to think I was the bad guy. Well, bye bye Poser 5. I'm not buying either

BTW, we all know anti-piracy measures do not work and only inconvenience those who have a legitimate copy. A certain percentage of warez users will buy the software (it's kind of "gee I actually USE this so I'm going to buy it). End result: CL loses sales. Where's the business sense in that? My guess is because if they don't implement the "latest and greatest" anti-piracy scheme, then they (and I mean all software companies here, not just CL) can't claim an estimated loss due to piracy when it comes tax time? Does any of the above sound like a logical explanation for doing the illogical?

Are you a Curious Labs employee? You seem to know a lot about this subject. Just wondering.

Lyne, I am very sure what I stated above is true, albeit vague. A simple reinstall on the same machine with the same hardware and software should not require a new code, however hardware changes will sometimes require a new code (even if you did not reinstall P5... just added RAM and a new video card for instance), and installing on a new computer will definitely require a new code. I've used other programs that use similar schemes, and I hate them. :( Movida, A lot of people agreed with you and those debates here were long and heated. CL had already made up their minds... and made an investment in the technology to implement this, so they weren't going back no matter what we said. Phoenix

Same thing with Microsoft, therefor, I still stick with Windows2000 and will never use XP. In the future, I may be "SWITCH".

wyrwulf: I don't know who you're asking if they're a CL employee...but it's right after my post so in case you were asking me...no, I'm not a CL employee. phoenixamon: If I had a new software that I wanted to get exposure I guarantee you I'd warez it myself. ....ducking now g

"Are you a Curious Labs employee? You seem to know a lot about this subject. Just wondering." I am. My name is Rylan Hazelton, I'm the IT Manager for Curious. I'm a long time lurker here.

Krazik is our IT Manager. Anthony Hernandez Curious Labs

Krazik, The conjecture statement was for those who are not CL employees. Since not all employees identify themselves, it is difficult to state that something is conjecture for everyone except X, Y, and Z. I am sure you understand... Although I do seriously appreciate your effort and those of other CL employees on this, and presumably, other sites for getting "into the trenches" with the users, I still have not seen a fully detailed explaination of CL's challenge/response system that answers the majority of the issues that have been conjectured by the users or potential consumers. I have read the low-res version of the manual, which I only knew about by reading through the threads here, and I would suggest that the EULA appears to have been written very vaguely and can easily be misinterpreted depending upon the individuals' previous experience, etc. For instance, if I read correctly, even the mere mention of "reverse engineering" the product constitutes a violation of the EULA (ref: Page 12, Section G, final sentence) which is a flagrant disregard for First Amendment rights (granted, they were written stating that the government could not restrict speech, but they are widely interpreted in other scenarios as well) as well as serious legal, ethical, technical, and other discussion points. I would highly doubt if this clause would be enforceable anywhere in the "free world", and it further demonstrates - to me at least - the presumption of guilty before proven innocent mentality that these types of protections are supposedly developed to prohibit. I would suggest having some legal entity look over the bulk of the EULA and ensure that the wording properly reflects CL's intentions, as well as ensuring that those intentions themselves are legally binding before using this in a commercial setting; for CL's and the end users' benefit. There are many other questions that are raised by the EULA alone, disregarding any further discussion about the registration process. However, I would still like to see a publicly available official statement by CL or one of its designated officials as to the process and procedures under which new registrations must be obtained and some further clarification as to the process itself before committing any financial investment in the product. I am sure many other users, based off some of the discussion here, feel the same way and this type of disclosure, again, would only serve both CL and the consumers. I am not trying to nit-pick, but a complete understanding by both parties has to exist before any agreement can be considered legally binding. As of this moment, I would say that many potential customers do not have a complete understanding of the registration process. Due to the vague nature of the documentation, I would hate to see either CL or the consumer suffer due to any misconceptions or misunderstandings.

Attached Link: http://www.ofb.biz/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=158

"...We are steadily heading to a future in which the control of humanity's intellectual property - works of art, multimedia, ideas, writings, etc. - is so vested in software vendor(s) that it is fair to say that the average user of a proprietary desktop will eventually no longer "own", in the traditional sense of the word, his or her own electronic creations. In other words, the products of our creative minds, the very essence of our humanity, are being relentlessly stripped from us.

If you use a proprietary OS to make a video or audio track, or to write a research paper, and save it in one of the default proprietary electronic data formats, you might soon find yourself actually paying someone else run-time and/or license renewal fees just to access your own creations. Not to mention any charges that may apply to distributing copies to others (whether directly or because the recipient must also pay similar runtime or recurring fees to access the data). You tell me, when you have to pay one particular vendor money every time you or someone else views a movie you created, who owns the movie? ..."
--Andreas Pour (check the URL for the detail.)

I must repost this again.

krazik: "You guys are too funny. Not one of you has seen it and you assume it's gonna be a huge inconvenience. :shakes head: If you have a web connection it take less than a minute to unlock your app." krazik, i'm nor assuming it, i know it. the trouble is that those times add to one another, as i described above. and it is inconvenient. due to heavy data income, i do clean install on my pcs every 9-12 months and i loose every time 2-3 days for those absurd confirmation stuff before everything starts working as normal. we have to make installs by ourselves, as i can't let anyone from outside handle our serial numbers and auth. codes. it means usually i have to do it during weekends and mostly wait for confirmation monday through tuesday. i know that cl didn't invent these system but i just hate this big brother stuff. how about this: you deliver ordered software and you get from me instead of money a letter with my telephone number. then you call me and i tell you from which bank you may get my money from. if you don't call within 30 days, that info becomes obsolete and you must call me again. silly, huh?

"It seems the ones that do pirate software are the ones complaining. Or they're Mac users and aren't with the program yet." Shonner, you have alot of nerve calling all of us who are "complaining" or trying to understand P5 before we buy it, "software pirates"...take your ignorant judgemental viewpoint somewhere else....

ooops, the last sentence was silly indeed, lol! but you get my point, no? ;)

Well - here is a thought for you people who are worried about the activation code... im planning on doing this to my system again soon. Get Nero Burning Rom, and a CD-R Drive if you don't already have one, wipe your hard drive, install your OS, and some of your other basic applications (including poser 5) do any updates/activation needed, install nero burning rom, and do a Hard Drive Backup Image. The next time you need to redo your computer, you just slap the cd's in and lettem rip, it prompts ya for each one as ya go, and once your done installing its just like how it was when u made the backup. The only major downfall of this is, the backup image only works for the same exact make/model of hd, so if you go from a 60gig to a 80gig your gonna be playing the reinstall game all over again.

What do you do if CL goes bust and discontinues its online operations. Or what do you do if a new version of poser comes along do they continue this validation scheme infinitely for poser 5 ? Why not have the option between this scheme and a required cd check each time you start the program. Then you are not nessecarly dependent on the internet. Just think of miscrosoft. They discontinue support for earlier versions of windows after a couple of years. This could meen they do not bother to make sure people can reactivate windows xp after a couple of years. Copy protection is absolutely a software companys right to implement. They should however plan for different future senarios. And I for one don't think it's fair to demand that people should update their software and hardware or else not be able to use a preveous version they bought fair and square. I know people have been saying this for years but the computer power of the high end computers has or will soon have a long head start compared to software demands. I don't think you need a 5 GHz computer with 10 GB ram to have fun using poser 5. And maybee some people will want to dabble a little into an obsession that they have laid to rest some years ago once in a while.

Please see my new thread that provides further information about registering Poser 5.

Shonner, your comments don't even deserve a response, but I can't remain silent. How dare you come in here and accuse people who want to continue using Poser 4 and the Millennium figures as "pirates just waiting for their free copy of Poser 5"! That's just plain stupid. You haven't even been around here long enough to know many of us, so you have no right to judge anyone here. Just for the record, I've purchased every version of Poser since way back to Poser 2. I bought Poser 2 from Egghead Software when they still had retail stores, and every other version I've owned I bought directly from MetaCreations themselves via their glossy ads that were mailed to their customers. What a childish thing for you to say. Why does this make you so angry that you strike out and call people names like this? Why do the comments of people here seem to insult you so much? Do you work for CL and it's hitting you personally? I'm not saying that there aren't ANY closet pirates here, but the vast majority of us here are legitimate users of Poser. So take your insulting comments and go somewhere else. Melanie >>Mother has spoken!<<

Nosfiratu is from CL, his new thread gives CL's viewpoint.

Shonner you have either not ever had to deal with the nightmare this can become or you are covering your backside ("... doth protest too much") Not everyone is a pirate - hell I just bought a 2nd version of Poser 4 for my son's computer so he could update if he chooses to and still own his own program when he moves out in a few years. So I don't even share the software in the same house! But like melanie I'm far less than pleased with the new characters and their textures I've seen thus far (the images looked like the guy had scars) but as long as I can still use my millenium characters I was happy to upgrade - until now. But I already have software that requires this - and when the companies server is down I have had to wait days to activate the software when I needed it. Gad forbid CL ever closes or goes bankrupt - no one wants to see that happen, but it certainly can with a software company where competition is often tough. Then what happens to the legitimate purchaser who buys a new system? This is supposed to prevent pirates but I don't honestly see how it will. The warezer offers the software and includes the fictitious name and serial number he used to "register" it so tehn veryone with that copies gets a new "activation" code because they know the answers.. Or more likely - a week after any updates are created they are made available by the little pirates and the only ones dealing with the hassle are those who paid for it. Some people get new systems every few years - companies especially, some simply get a virus and have to reformat or any other possibilities. So if there is an issue with the site and it's a weekend/holiday they can't use Poser5. That costs time to those who may actually be using Poser for something other than a hobby. So no I may not upgrade now - and if I don't I won't upgrade my son't copy either. Doesn't make me a pirate - just a legitimate customer who knows what can happen when the authorization system fails.

3-D Arena | Instagram | Facebook

I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use.
-Galileo

"I can judge whoever and however I want. Get used to it." Ahh, the voice of maturity and morality all rolled into one. So glad that someone is offering respectable and responsible insight into an issue that so many seem to care about. BTW: My Poser figure can beat up your Poser figure! LOL

why don't you guys just ignore the troll like everyone else does?

>>You're going to stay with P4, M_M, just because of how P5 installs? Right. I'd say you're just another pirate waiting for your free copy of P5.<< Nope. I had to borrow the money to buy mine, but it's legit...(see attached scan) You simply assume that anyone who disagrees must be "one of them"... Sort of like Joseph McCarthy...

---

Jeff

Renderosity Senior Moderator

Hablo español

Ich spreche Deutsch

Je parle français

Mi parolas Esperanton. Ĉu vi?

for answering my question about Rylan's connection to CuriousLabs. It would make things much easier if everyone that is posting as a representative of a company would let us know what company they are associated with and in what capacity. Anthony always puts his signature in his posts when he is acting as a CL representative.

Does "Paradise" automaticly connect to the web when you install P5?, and can you turn it off? I know you do not have to use it, but can you turn it off.

If by no other means, it should be possibleby using external systems like a firewall. Of course, for the "normal" user, if they used, say Internet Explorer's internals, for the Paradise room, it may be more difficult to filter out the traffic or prevent it from connecting.

Would I still be connected when I closed Poser5? You would think CL would give you the option of connecting or not. I don't like the idea of being constantly connected. It seems to be a open back door to your system. I am not a computer expert, and that kind of thing makes me nervous. I understand CL view on "Protection with registion", but I donot understand why I should be forced to have a net connection I donot want. What about "protection" for me? Maybe I'm jumping the gun, is there anyone who can clarify things? I believe I should determine whether I am web connected or not(no matter how safe that connection is supposed to be. If the connection is supposed to be for my benefit, why force it on me by having a consrant connection? I'm not saying do away with paradise, I will proabilty use it, just give me the option of turning it off.

Well, hypothetically, it should only open the connection upon request and close it when you are done. However, there may be some "state recording" information (ie, maybe a cookie) that would allow you to go to the previous state you were in when you last visited; like a particular store or section you visited. To me, the description sounds kind of like browser-integration that has been done in other software packages. Since most firewall users want to surf the net, they usually let their browser connect and/or allow traffic on port 80 (http) for net connections through the firewall. As these are more or less "trusted" ports, they can be easily manipulated for "less legitimate" purposes. It is theorhetically possible that CL/P5 may keep an "open door" via the Paradise room; however, when people find out this is the case, it would turn into more of a ruckus than the activation scheme currently being debated. I am sure someone with enough knowledge will run P5 with some form of packet sniffer (something that records and analyzes network/Internet traffic) and see just what information can be gained/is transmitted by both the activation scheme and/or the Paradise room.

Cyberstretch wrote: "I have read the low-res version of the manual, which I only knew about by reading through the threads here, and I would suggest that the EULA appears to have been written very vaguely and can easily be misinterpreted depending upon the individuals' previous experience, etc." Well said!! At the insistance of a friend and potential vendor to AniMotions asked me to look at the new EULA and asked if this would affect the Freestuff and online store area's of the Community sites and if the vendors and online stores were required to pay royalities to Curious Labs. (see pg. 13 entitled Content Distribution). Admittedly, I didn't think that this is the case. But after reading their subsections C, D and E, I am not so sure. Granted I am no lawyer (but will be having one looking this over come Tuesday) but according to this, nothing in .CR2 format(and all of the other Poser 5 formats) can be copyrighted. Which leaves all of the vendors and freestuff contributors UNPROTECTED FROM THE SAME WAREZ KIDDIES that resulted in Curious Labs adding this Challenge Code for. I could be wrong, but the way it reads to me is those people who run Online Stores or make product to support Poser 5 and themselves, they will no longer have the means to combat warez and must bite the bullet if their own products are in Poser 5 formats are copied, resold, warezed, used commercially without permission or given away and are subject to paying royalties to Curious Labs for the use of such formats. Like I said, I am not a lawyer and I admitt being really friggen confused when reading this new EULA and have sent an e-mail to Kupa asking about it. But if I am reading this right, I wont be supporting Poser 5. Jack PS - Aleks, NICE ONE!! Your anology of having the Software company calling you to get bank information was so funny I sprayed Mt Dew all over my keyboard!! :o)

Jack, Thanks for the acknowledgement/compliment. I was beginning to wonder if I had become "hyper-critical" in my, er, "old age". Although I am not a lawyer either, I have been involved at several places ensuring that our licensing was "legal" and attempting to stop illegal software, etc, from company systems. Therefore, I have become exposed, over time, to a number of different contracts and legal documents and one can very easily spot something that appears not to have been written by a legal-minded professional. (Think legalese, ie incomprehensible words you need a dictionary for, and highly repetitive/cross-referenced wording; among many other "distinctions".) Also, I am definitely biased to consumer vs corporate advocacy, and I openly acknowledge that. I will "defend to the death" consumer rights because, quite frankly, corporations have shown a severe and growing disregard for their source of income (consumers) and frequently corporations, or their officials/employees, prove to be their biggest liability; not the consumers or even the non-consumers. The once famous adage, "The Customer is Always Right!", now seems transformed into "The Customer is Never Right!!!". Hopefully, there is a bastion of companies, like CL and others, that will prove once again that by treating customers as their top priority they can overcome even the "significant" losses due to illegal activity.

thanks, jack ;o) i hope it wasn't the nonsense in the last sentence that made you clean your monitor. it should read "after 30 days you'll have to write me a letter, where you send me your new adress (different then last one - ok, maybe i'll allow three times the same adress ;)), and i shall send you my new phone number - the old one is obsolete - to ask me about your money." if someone turns these protection around like this, one sees the absurdness of that all. why, i also want to protect my money! ;o) i'd really like to know if there are some seriuos researches somewhere about this problem, if this "protection" really protects software companies from warez theft and how much.

Cyber: You're right, the "Customer is always right" has indeed changed in the times we now face. And in fact you have to go through 20 minutes of computerized switchboards before you can talk to anyone live to clear up (if you are lucky) a problem with most companies these days. Fortunately, CL hasn't entirely gone to this and I suspect after much public outcry they will rethink their strategy. The bottom line is they need us, more than we need them, and to keep us they will have to make concessions to keep their consumers happy. It's just the nature of business. There is nothing wrong with them wanting to protect their IP, but when that protection begins to impede the protections of others or becomes to much of a hinderance for their consumers, something is going to have to be done. Aleks: Yep it was the last line, though not because it was written wrong but because you really pointed out the absurdness of this protection scheme. In some regard, the companies are going to have to trust it's consumers, no different than some consumers have to learn to trust some companies. Trust is a two way street. Jack

Attached Link: IDC - Software Piracy: How Big Is the Threat?

aleks, If you really want to know, I found a report for **$1,000US** (for 35 pages or roughly $29/page) that may tell you. :0)

lol, thanks, cyber. well, it's one way to cover your costs! :)