Protection against piracy - the views of software developers
I would like to better understand the position of many business software developers, companies and individuals regarding the introduction of any anti-piracy mechanisms in their programs. After all, the problem of piracy, according to their own statements, is extremely acute.
Communicating with many of them I met different opinions, some of which certainly have the right to life ...
For example, according to the head of the development team of a very large Russian software company:
“We are developing our own defense. It’s easier for us to do it ourselves, because the whole process is tailored to our business model and to our distribution system. ”
I have nothing against it, the decision to install this or that protection is everyone’s business. At first glance it seems that it is more profitable, but a simple calculation shows:
')
Given:
- The salary of the employee who develops the protection - ~ 50 000 p / month.
- Add here the collection of requirements, writing a technical task, testing.
- Accompanying
By experience, the development accumulates about 30% of all costs.
Even if you take into account only the salary of a programmer, then the amount per year is 600,000 rubles! While the annual license for the use of third-party solutions can cost thousands of 50. At the same time, the protection will be many times more reliable. You can do application software, and they protect.
And here is another opinion of the technical director:
“To protect our programs, we use USB keys. Good reliability.
Protection using any kind of HASP is reliable, although for almost all models there are hacking methods described on the Internet and being in the public domain. The main problem of keys is not their reliability or high cost (at least $ 10 for one key with an acceptable level of reliability), but that their presence significantly complicates logistics and distribution. It is necessary together with each copy of the program to send customers keys. The cost of such protection is justified in the case of expensive, highly specialized software, produced in small editions.
Another point of view of the developer:
"The presence of pirated versions on the Internet allows us to have a more extensive feedback from consumers, improve our software and fix bugs in it."
I can not disagree with this position. An excellent example of how competent leaders use the opposing evil in their own interests. However, this approach is justified only at the stage of the ORIGINAL SCRIPTURE. When a consumer knows what to buy, he buys. If there are rumors about your program that it is easy to download in the internet, then no one will buy, everyone will download. Especially if the functionality of the commercial and "pirated" versions is no different.
Do you know a lot of people who have a licensed archiver on a computer? Because everyone knows that downloading it is not a problem.
Any sane manager wants to recoup development costs. How to do it if you do not defend yourself, if the lion's share of your distribution falls on torrents?
Found an excellent quote about this on the Adode site:
“Violators of software copyrights jeopardize progress and innovation, deprive software developers and publishers of the benefits that they would have to receive thanks to their hard-earned intellectual property ....
… .Innovation is fed by material incentives, and when the creators of computer programs do not receive fair remuneration for their work, they have no motivation to waste time and energy on creating new, improved products. ”
Here is another opinion:
"We work together with the executive authorities, we organize raids on pirated retail outlets."
I visit the Paveletskaya metro station, the center of Moscow, every day, and watch pirated products in the subway every day. There, the police often walk alongside often (since the place is not the most peaceful, after all the station is nearby). And at least that. Even if we assume that the police in this area are not corrupt, then we must also be able to distinguish between pirated and licensed products, because, for example, it is easiest to fake a holographic sticker.
Why am I all this? All are free to choose how to act and what protection to choose / not choose for themselves. However, recent practice shows that non-core types of work for a company are cheaper and more efficient to give to professionals, focusing on the main type of activity.
Communicating with many of them I met different opinions, some of which certainly have the right to life ...
For example, according to the head of the development team of a very large Russian software company:
“We are developing our own defense. It’s easier for us to do it ourselves, because the whole process is tailored to our business model and to our distribution system. ”
I have nothing against it, the decision to install this or that protection is everyone’s business. At first glance it seems that it is more profitable, but a simple calculation shows:
')
Given:
- The salary of the employee who develops the protection - ~ 50 000 p / month.
- Add here the collection of requirements, writing a technical task, testing.
- Accompanying
By experience, the development accumulates about 30% of all costs.
Even if you take into account only the salary of a programmer, then the amount per year is 600,000 rubles! While the annual license for the use of third-party solutions can cost thousands of 50. At the same time, the protection will be many times more reliable. You can do application software, and they protect.
And here is another opinion of the technical director:
“To protect our programs, we use USB keys. Good reliability.
Protection using any kind of HASP is reliable, although for almost all models there are hacking methods described on the Internet and being in the public domain. The main problem of keys is not their reliability or high cost (at least $ 10 for one key with an acceptable level of reliability), but that their presence significantly complicates logistics and distribution. It is necessary together with each copy of the program to send customers keys. The cost of such protection is justified in the case of expensive, highly specialized software, produced in small editions.
Another point of view of the developer:
"The presence of pirated versions on the Internet allows us to have a more extensive feedback from consumers, improve our software and fix bugs in it."
I can not disagree with this position. An excellent example of how competent leaders use the opposing evil in their own interests. However, this approach is justified only at the stage of the ORIGINAL SCRIPTURE. When a consumer knows what to buy, he buys. If there are rumors about your program that it is easy to download in the internet, then no one will buy, everyone will download. Especially if the functionality of the commercial and "pirated" versions is no different.
Do you know a lot of people who have a licensed archiver on a computer? Because everyone knows that downloading it is not a problem.
Any sane manager wants to recoup development costs. How to do it if you do not defend yourself, if the lion's share of your distribution falls on torrents?
Found an excellent quote about this on the Adode site:
“Violators of software copyrights jeopardize progress and innovation, deprive software developers and publishers of the benefits that they would have to receive thanks to their hard-earned intellectual property ....
… .Innovation is fed by material incentives, and when the creators of computer programs do not receive fair remuneration for their work, they have no motivation to waste time and energy on creating new, improved products. ”
Here is another opinion:
"We work together with the executive authorities, we organize raids on pirated retail outlets."
I visit the Paveletskaya metro station, the center of Moscow, every day, and watch pirated products in the subway every day. There, the police often walk alongside often (since the place is not the most peaceful, after all the station is nearby). And at least that. Even if we assume that the police in this area are not corrupt, then we must also be able to distinguish between pirated and licensed products, because, for example, it is easiest to fake a holographic sticker.
Why am I all this? All are free to choose how to act and what protection to choose / not choose for themselves. However, recent practice shows that non-core types of work for a company are cheaper and more efficient to give to professionals, focusing on the main type of activity.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/117716/
All Articles