On 8 Sep 97 at 23:14, Eric Smith wrote: > Andrew G Williams wrote: > > In what way is changing the settings of my own system clock unethical? > > I'm not altering a single byte of program code. > > The following comments assume the abscence of a license agreement: > > The mere act of setting the clock of your computer back is not > illegal, and probably everyone would agree that it is not unethical. > > It is well-established legally (at least in the US) that the > consumer has the right to make any desired alterations to purchased > products. This includes patching object code. It has even been > found that any interim copies which are made solely as a necessary > step in the alteration are covered as fair use. > > I would argue that patching per se is not unethical. > > However, I personally consider it to be unethical to either set back > the clock or to patch out the checking in order to circumvent the > author's intended restrictions on a trial version of a software > package. > > IMHO, if the software is worth using, it is worth buying. Further, that crippling s/w more than having a 'use by' date on it, is self-defeating for the author, in that it prevents the user from trying out the code. An instance - A piece of software called CAMCAD is available for read/modify/write of differing formats of say pcb artwork. However, it is crippled to the extent where - you can't edit - you can only read a limited number of formats - you can't export as a different format. As shareware this is useless - I don't know if it will let me move a file from one format to another then into another piece of s/w. All I know about it is that its screen redraw speed is slow with a complex board (with a fast video system) - something that does not impel me to register it. If I could try its other features I might not be swayed by thee speed, and I might possibly register it - but not as it is. So they have lost a sale. MikeS (remove the you know what before replying)