Copy protection - Yea or Nay?

[nightshade]

I am looking for some opinions surrounding the issue of copy protection as it might apply to the retail sale of my solution. The specific details of my situation will be:

Distribution: retail sales, software download only, 8.5 runtime solution on PC and Mac with full access privileges stripped. Since there will be a full featured demo version available, I am not planning to offer a money-back guarantee except where may be required by law - still have to research this.

Typical target cutomer: average, non-technical computer user.

The Solution: Relatively small activity-simplifying/time-saving application selling in the $20-$30 range, with potentially broad appeal to many people, ie if an individual likes the demo enough to purchase the full version, it is highly likely that they have one or more buddies that they feel could also make use of it. It is a non-work related application, but may well be used on personal time in an office and passed around among coworkers.

Me: not a first time FMP developer, but the first time with a solution for outside, retail distribution.

I have already implemented a copy protection scheme which prevents easy redistribution, but will not stop a serious, dedicated effort. I am trying to decide whether or not to enable it, or perhaps if I should enable and strengthen it. I also have a mechanism in place that could allow a disabled solution to be reenabled in real time by a code with a limited duration validity.

My gut instinct is telling me that in this price range, there is a lot of redistribution by generally honest individuals that would not give away something that cost $250, but might well do so with something that cost $25, because it is "only $25 and not really a big deal".

So I guess my concerns are:

1. Is there likely to be a lot of redistribution of the solution? Enough to require copy protection?

2. Do small solutions like this attract enough attention to be cracked and posted as warez or is it more a matter of popularity rather than value? Is having a reenabling code a bad idea? The code is multiply encoded and variable, but a reasonably talented hacker could probably reverse engineer it. I suppose that a one-time download link would probably be a safer way to resolve the issue of a disabled solution, than a reenabling code.

3. Does copy protection create more losses through customer frustration and support issues, than it saves through redistribution prevention?

Any opinions or other issues for consideration would be greatly appreciated.

Nightshade

Edited August 29, 2006 by Guest

[The Big Bear]

Hi Nightshade

I had the same question as you and talk to a lawyer friend of mine about copyright protection.

He told me that if you are going to sell your software solution to the public, the software should be copy right protected because someone can buy a copy of your software and they can make some small changes and then copy right protect it and you are out of business because they own the software now.

Lionel

[SteveB]

Its very hard, if not impossible to determine whether a $250 app is more likely to be passed around than is a $25 app. Some of it has to do with the circumstances...lots of people working in the same office versus single users in different companies might be more important than price.

Since no app can be made totally hacker proof, don't invest an inordinate amount of time trying. Some months ago, someone posted this Web Site that looked really interesting and would appear to stop trading software. I haven't used it, but I got deep enough to be impressed. AND, it's reasonably priced, although it may be overkill for a product at the low end of the price range.

Steve

Edited August 29, 2006 by Guest

[nightshade]

Hi Nightshade

I had the same question as you and talk to a lawyer friend of mine about copyright protection.

...

Lionel

Thanks Lionel, but I was actually inquiring about copy protection, not copyright protection. I have copyright notices on the About screen along with a license agreement that, among other things, precludes reverse engineering and/or creating derivitive works. At this point I do not plan to register the copyright, as that is not really required - I believe it only serves to further simplify any legal proceedings that may come up regarding rights. If the solution appears to head in the direction of becoming very popular and successful, then I will probably go through the expense of further tightening things up with registration of copyrights and trademarks. If I only end up selling a handful of copies a month, then it wouldn't have been worth the expense or effort.

In any case, these are only legal devices and are really only meaningful if you can actually afford the significant time and money to pursue violations through the legal system. I am more concerned with doing what I can to reduce the likelihood of such up front, rather than resolving them afterwards.

The fact that the solution is stripped makes reverse engineering tough. Someone would essentially have to engineer the whole thing based on the concept of it and observation of how it works. That is a lot of work - as much work as it took to create it, less the 5% or so of design time. I am more concerned at this point with the theft and redistribution of the original, rather than the theft and reselling of the concept.

As this is all new to me, I may well be wrong in my analysis of the situation, so any and all comments are appreciated. Thanks again.

Nightshade

[nightshade]

Its very hard, if not impossible to determine whether a $250 app is more likely to be passed around than is a $25 app. Some of it has to do with the circumstances...lots of people working in the same office versus single users in different companies might be more important than price.

Since no app can be made totally hacker proof, don't invest an inordinate amount of time trying. Some months ago, someone posted this Web Site that looked really interesting and would appear to stop trading software. I haven't used it, but I got deep enough to be impressed. AND, it's reasonably priced, although it may be overkill for a product at the low end of the price range.

Steve

Steve, I updated the original post to include the following info: It is a non-work related application, but may well be used on personal time in an office and passed around among co-workers.

Thanks for the input. I have a couple of concerns with CopyMinder. First, it doesn't support the Mac, so doesn't provide a complete solution for xplat FileMaker solutions. Second, I have been burned previously by dependence on a 3rd party web service that was shut down for fiscal reasons. They seem to have anough big clients, that they are not going to just go away, but there is always the possiblity of a catastrophe. They notably do not mention anything about having redundant facilities or systems, which should be a must for this type of service. I am also not too keen on dealing with recurring charges, particularly in a foreign currency and the time difference with the UK would make timely support somewhat problematical. Perhaps I'll look for something comparable that is US based. Thanks.

[bcooney]

Have you looked at Brian Dunning's EasyEncrypt? It's an all FM solution, so you won't be dependent on an outside party.

[SteveB]

There is also Ray Cologon's solution on his site www.nightwing.com to consider.

Steve